or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Icahn reveals discussion with Apple CEO Tim Cook got 'a little testy'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Icahn reveals discussion with Apple CEO Tim Cook got 'a little testy' - Page 2

post #41 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

I don't recall hearing about Jobs ever meeting financial morons like him. He cared more about the products and I doubt he had the slightest interest in or patience for Wall St or even lawyers and financial people within Apple unless they were working on something he wanted or of direct relevance to the products. Sadly I think this demonstrates just how different Cook is from Jobs and it worries me a little.

Tim Cook just seems to try to keep people happy. There are a lot of conflicts going to crop up because of this. The Apple employees regularly state that they don't put much importance on money and yet the cash hoarding, tax setups seem to run counter to that but is part of their fiduciary responsibility. Their employment almost requires that they operate counter to their core values. At the same time, a lot of the major stockholders likely primarily care about money and the major ones have a say in how the company is run. So people who don't care about money yet have a responsibility to care about it because of the people whose only interest in Apple is money are not going to see eye to eye.

I'd say one difference between Tim and Steve is that Steve wouldn't try to keep everyone happy, he always had teams competing for success. Tim prefers collaboration. When a stockholder would have something to say, I'd expect Tim to try and work it out. Steve would most likely just wear his values on his sleeve and let people deal with it e.g doing a good job should be its own reward and if financial success is a result then so be it. Steve was asked about how he felt when Apple surpassed Microsoft's market cap and what he said was:

"It's surreal, but it doesn't matter very much. It's not what's important. It's not what makes you come to work in the morning. It's not why any of our customers buy our products so I think it's good for us to keep that in mind and just what we're doing and why we're doing it.

Apple was about 90 days from going bankrupt in the early days and it was much worse than I thought when I went back but I expected that all the good people would have left and I found these miraculous people, these great people and I tried to ask this as tactfully as I could but "why are you still here?" and a lot of them had this little phrase "I bleed in 6 colors", which was the old Apple logo and it was code for 'because I love what this place stands for'"

People who are involved in finance don't all understand this because they put a price tag on everything. The documentaries about the stock traders that caused the financial crisis talk about how they would go to prostitutes, have it billed to their company cards under miscellaneous expenses and then go home to their families. How they would take cocaine all night long and get up to go to work the next day making risky trades but taking no responsibility. These kind of values (or lack thereof) don't align with the people who work at Apple.

I don't think that people who have these disparate natures can reconcile this because it's like trying to explain to someone why you prefer chocolate ice-cream over strawberry. Everyone lives their lives to reach positive states of mind. Some people see everything as material and therefore subordinate to the common exchange currency of money and that's a valid way to look at things but has the side-effect of placing money first. Other people see that money is a byproduct of things that are of genuine value and it's the latter that comes first. When doing a good job because that's the goal results in financial success, both groups are happy. When a point is reached where doing a good job doesn't give the same financial reward because of inherent limits in the market, that's where it breaks down. The people who want the money don't care about the long term values of Apple, they want paid now, they want growth now, they want more innovation now.

Under the assumption that the people at Apple don't care about money, it might seem that draining the cash reserves to benefit the stockholders would be ok. It wouldn't matter to the people at Apple what happens with it and the money-grabbers get their loot/growth. But rewarding short-term investors over long-term investors runs counter to their values and Tim's primary responsibility is in making sure Apple is on a steady course to stay around because Apple is one of the diamonds in the rough that needs to stay around. Bending to the whims of greedy individuals doesn't set a good precedent for this.

The problem remains that they have a lot of cash and are not doing anything with it. That's the problem that needs to be solved. Stock buybacks are fine as long as the company trades below its intrinsic value. Apple isn't really trading below this any more. If they want to spend for long term stability then they should be buying into timeless business models like content creation/distribution. They can do some crazy things like buying Disney but they should be sensible about where technology is going and make suitable purchases. It's a lot about the people at the companies too rather than what they do. I'd much rather see them use the cash to do buyouts because one of the most recent resulted in the fingerprint sensor so that gets filtered down to customers and what customers love. Stock buybacks do no such thing. It's fine when cash is excessive but $150b can be put to far better use.
post #42 of 64

Let investors run Apple? I've never heard anything that stupid, I'm gonna quote Tallest and say to Icahn:
"Go away!"

 

Tim and Peter Op just wasted an evening with this idiot, sure, let investors jerk Apple around like the way they buy and dump stock, those people don't give a crap about Apple and what Apple stands for, Icahn definitely doesn't, just vultures trying to corner fat prey, but stupid vultures.

post #43 of 64
Yes, Apple should listen to the shareholders! And I'm a shareholder! Tell Carl to FK off! I trust the management of Apple, exclusively, not some corporate raider out to make a quick buck, with absolutely no concern for the long term health of the company. I also believe in one man, one vote, so I want an equal say to Carl.
post #44 of 64
Icaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhn!
post #45 of 64
If Icahn dumps his AAPL shares in a fit of pique, I hope Apple immediately expands their buyback program to take advantage of the decline.
post #46 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

If Icahn dumps his AAPL shares in a fit of pique, I hope Apple immediately expands their buyback program to take advantage of the decline.

 

Love it!

post #47 of 64

I posted this the last time we talked about Icahn:

 

From the Apple Corporate Governance Guidelines:  

I. The Role of the Board of Directors

The Board oversees the Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) and other senior management in the competent and ethical operation of the Corporation on a day-to-day basis and assures that the long- term interests of the shareholders are being served. To satisfy its duties, directors are expected to take a proactive, focused approach to their position, and set standards to ensure that the Corporation is committed to business success through the maintenance of high standards of responsibility and ethics. 

 

If we could just take out that part about "interests of the shareholders are being served" things would be better.  Shareholders ruin everything.

post #48 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoonerYoda View Post

Split the stock Cook!

????   is this funny? as it's no strategy to stop iCahn's rant.

post #49 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post
 

I posted this the last time we talked about Icahn:

 

From the Apple Corporate Governance Guidelines:  

I. The Role of the Board of Directors

The Board oversees the Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) and other senior management in the competent and ethical operation of the Corporation on a day-to-day basis and assures that the long- term interests of the shareholders are being served. To satisfy its duties, directors are expected to take a proactive, focused approach to their position, and set standards to ensure that the Corporation is committed to business success through the maintenance of high standards of responsibility and ethics. 

 

If we could just take out that part about "interests of the shareholders are being served" things would be better.  Shareholders ruin everything.

 

Then you have no owners…  it becomes a collective… then it's COMMUNISM!   

 

Pinko! /s

post #50 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

The board needs to consider the needs of all shareholders and how to keep the company valuable.. but Icahn has been able to use lawsuits to sell the idea that "wahtever maximizes shareholder return in the short term is the boards duty".... and that could be very dangerous.

Alas, now that Icahn has a position, it's too late to enact such measures, so hopefully they did it back in the 1990s when they were vulneragble to a hostile takeover. 

Icahn doesn't have a board position. You're thinking of Microsoft where an investor was able to elbow for a position.
post #51 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

I posted this the last time we talked about Icahn:

From the Apple Corporate Governance Guidelines:  



I.
 The Role of the Board of Directors

The Board oversees the Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) and other senior management in the competent and ethical operation of the Corporation on a day-to-day basis and assures that the long- term interests of the shareholders are being served. To satisfy its duties, directors are expected to take a proactive, focused approach to their position, and set standards to ensure that the Corporation is committed to business success through the maintenance of high standards of responsibility and ethics. 




If we could just take out that part about "interests of the shareholders are being served" things would be better.  Shareholders ruin everything.

YOu need to re-read the sentence, as it clearly says LONG-TERM interests of the shareholders... Not the quarterly or annual interests...the LONG-TERM interests.
post #52 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbirge View Post

Icaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhn!

 

 

that's 'testy'

post #53 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


No one ever claimed that it would weaken Icahn's (or anyone else's) share value.

What it achieves is that it makes the stock more affordable for small investors. The average investor who can set aside $100 a month to buy shares is far more likely to buy AAPL monthly than to wait 5 months and then buy one share. There's also a psychological difference for the small investor. Buying shares at $50 isn't as scary as buying them at $500 - even if the actual proportional value doesn't change.

That yields two results:

1. If it brings new investors into the market, it increases demand for the stock, thereby increasing the price. Even though each individual investor only buys a few shares, the aggregate amount could be significant.

2. It would have absolutely no impact on institutional buyers or large buyers like Icahn. Any effect would be only on smaller buyers - and could therefore shift the ownership slightly away from institutions (who tend to buy and sell at the drop of a hat and create a lot of volatility).

While the total number of shares would be modest, it doesn't take a lot to have an impact. A couple million shares one way or the other could be significant.

 

Read what you wrote again. All of the points you made are pretty much the antithesis of Apple. Just like Buffet, Jobs wanted the actual value of the stock realized, so splitting the stock achieves the exact opposite.

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply
post #54 of 64

WS greedy criminals want 150b, so they've selected Icahn as their emissary to lure it out. Pathetic, yet understandable. They want to make one last good earning on AAPL and then move to something else on what they have together decided.

post #55 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Icahn is like a shark reacting to a waft of blood. No doubt to him, Apple looks beleaguered and its management weak. Good for Cook standing up to him! You don't want Icahn hanging around. He carries an air and reputation of mismanagement and destruction all about him, like the dust cloud around Pig-Pen.

 

Not sure how any sane person can consider the most successful company on the planet "beleaguered", which recently smashed all of its previous sales records yet again (and that of any other company), and became the most valuable brand in the world, exceeding Coca Cola. 

 

Then again, this is Apple, and standard rational logic does not apply. 

post #56 of 64
Open your eyes. Investors used have a long term interest in a company. Today, it is all about quick wins, sucking as much as they can and then leaving a mess behind.

"And the board, in this kind of a case, should be listening to what the shareholders want." - Yes, we know what you want.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
post #57 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

I posted this the last time we talked about Icahn:

From the Apple Corporate Governance Guidelines:  



I.
 The Role of the Board of Directors

The Board oversees the Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”) and other senior management in the competent and ethical operation of the Corporation on a day-to-day basis and assures that the long- term interests of the shareholders are being served. To satisfy its duties, directors are expected to take a proactive, focused approach to their position, and set standards to ensure that the Corporation is committed to business success through the maintenance of high standards of responsibility and ethics. 




If we could just take out that part about "interests of the shareholders are being served" things would be better.  Shareholders ruin everything.

Shareholders own the company.

But none of them on their own. If iCahn has a 2Bn position he owns less than 0.5% as Apple is valued at 420bn at the moment.

Get lost.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #58 of 64
"And the board, in this kind of a case, should be listening to what the shareholders want."

And this shareholder wants you to sell off all your Apple shares and get the hell out of here.
post #59 of 64
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
While he initially described dinner with Tim Cook as "cordial," Icahn later revealed in an interview that his talks with Apple's CEO about the use of the company's cash reserves were "a little testy" at times.

 

I’ll bet that after being told he doesn’t know what to do with the money he himself earned, Tim Cook wanted to give a little kick to the testes, at least.

 

Originally Posted by jonbirge View Post
Icaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhn!

 

G44

 

“From Cupertino’s heart I short thee!”

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #60 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonkoTheSane View Post

Open your eyes. Investors used have a long term interest in a company. Today, it is all about quick wins, sucking as much as they can and then leaving a mess behind.

"And the board, in this kind of a case, should be listening to what the shareholders want." - Yes, we know what you want.

His statement is true. The Board should be listening to what shareholders want. But that doesn't mean that they have to do it.

The way corporate governance works is that shareholders select a Board. The Board is given responsibility for directing the company and usually does so by hiring a CEO to follow their guidance. If the Board is unhappy with the CEO, they fire him/her. If the shareholders are unhappy with the board, they replace them. That's it.

Now, Icahn is free to try to get the Board replaced if he wishes, but that would be pretty silly given that his biggest complaint is that they're generating so much cash that they are 'only' distributing $100 B to shareholders in the next 2 years. He can't really have it both ways. You don't get to pick and choose which Board actions you like. You either accept the Board or you replace them. And a proposal to replace the Board would get him laughed out of Wall Street (if not locked up in the loony bin).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #61 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by firhill07 View Post

What I don't get is why did Tim Cook actually meet with him? What is the obligation? Or is it that Tim Cook wants Icahn to be his broker to plan a large buyout? What is about Icahn that should amuse Tim?

 

This is what I want to know...

post #62 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by daphreev View Post

This is what I want to know...

Free dinner. lol.gif
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #63 of 64
perhaps mr. Icahn should try to "fix" blackberry... but then that is a challenge... but instead of owning a measily half of a percent of apple, (1.5 BILLION) he could get 33% percent of blackberry!!... and since he is a genius he could generate unbelievable riches for himself... because blackberry was once at least 135 a share, but it is at 9 dollars now! and it can only go up!!!.... you know he could increase his value 15 times his investment... /sarcasm
Edited by haar - 10/2/13 at 10:13am
post #64 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post

Wow. this guy is such a clown. What's best for the company IS best for the shareholders. It is a comfort that Apple has a large sum in savings. Wether it is used for the proverbial famine season or unforseeable acquisition needs, it is actually the best thing that Apple has such cash to back them up.

 

Can't say I agree with you on this. From an efficient corporate finance perspective, there's not a whole lot of reasons for Apple to hold on to so much cash especially considering that Apple is able to issue bonds at very very low interest rates. For acquisitions, there's no real good reason to spend your own cash when you finance it with debt at low interest rates

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Icahn reveals discussion with Apple CEO Tim Cook got 'a little testy'