or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Carl Icahn urges Apple to make immediate tender offer for $150B in stock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Carl Icahn urges Apple to make immediate tender offer for $150B in stock - Page 2

post #41 of 85
Carl Icahn is NOT an investor - he is a corporate raider. His role in the demise of TWA has already been mentioned. His game plan: 1) buy enough stock in a company that has cash on hand to be elected to the Board of Directors; 2) control the Board by bringing on 'associates;' 3) break up the company and sell the component parts for more cash; 4) leave the empty shell behind; 5) claim success for stockholders; i.e., himself and friends.

btw - 'investors' contribute nothing to the company whose stock they buy - unless they are buying treasure shares. The money goes to the seller - not the company.

Carl Icahn's behavior is a principal reason the 'poison pill' was invented.
post #42 of 85
"... the result would be an immediate 33% boost to earnings per share, translating into a 33% increase in the value of the shares..."

He hasn't been around here very long.
post #43 of 85
Why would a company use 90% of the cash they have to buy stock? That's STUPID. Apple has better things to do with that money.

They have money to invest and they have money to buy land, buildings, equipment, pay for research, have around just in case need to fend off a competitor.
post #44 of 85
Greedy little man, that Icahn is...

I don't doubt his strategy, but investment bankers sole goal is to make money. Regardless of the company, they are going to milk any profitable firm (that took decades of hard work and dedication by all stakeholders to build) until they literally kill the golden cow. Then they will move on to the next one. They can't help themselves.

I have had Apple computers since 1978 (Apple II s/n 6293) and an investor since they first went public. Apple's sole goal is to make great products (and services) for its customers (period). Steve knew that the money/success would follow if they delivered on that promise (and it has, beyond his and anyone's wildest dreams).

These two philosophies are diametrically opposed. They cannot co-exist. As one reader pointed out - there will be lawsuits...

I, for one, am quite pleased with Apple's buyback and dividend policy and will strongly vote against Mr. Icahn's plans. Going forward "content" (books, apps, music, video) is the key to Apple's present value model. Apple has always been great at forging strategic partnerships to break monopolies/"status quo business models" such as now exist in the TV broadcast industry, and worldwide telecommunications. They need a bankroll as leverage to do this, and it would be foolish to limit Apple's strategic business options by taking that away from them.

Apple has the ability to be the first company valued in the trillions of dollars, if can maintain its core business strategy and make some bold strategic decisions/investments. Now that's cool!
post #45 of 85
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
Why would a company use 90% of the cash they have to buy stock? That's STUPID. Apple has better things to do with that money.

 

The implication is that they’ll take a loan to buy it back.

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 #46 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Don't forget its the SHAREHOLDERS that own Apple.  Not Tim Cook.  Not the Board of Directors.  I'd love to see this proposal being voted on during the next annual meeting.  Let the SHAREHOLDERS decide.

Shareholders elect board members to make many decisions. Let's keep it that way.
post #47 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Netflix went up 450% since Ichan bought.

I bought Apple when it was $65. So their success can be attributed to me.
post #48 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

As a small shareholder of Apple (own about $150,000) I agree with Mr Icahn in theory.  Warren Buffet himself told Steve Jobs to buy back stock if he believed the shares were vastly undervalued.  So far Apple has bought back about $30B in shares and the stock has gone up about 15% since then.  That's about $5B they saved right there.



 



Looking at a 5 year cash flow perspective I see no problem with such a plan:



 



Cash at 6/30/13 - $150B



Cash at 12/31/13 - $180B



Less buyback - $150B



5 years @ $50B free cash flows per year



 



Cash at 12/31/18 -  $280B



 



That's almost enough money to buy Google.  Without an increased buyback the balance would be $400B.  That's totally ridiculous.  Keep in mind that IBM bought back about 40% of its shares in a 10 year period.  It's not unprecedented.  Just the dollar amounts seem so ridiculous because of Apple's size.



 



I do disagree on a tender offer.  I'd rather Apple buyback shares strategically instead of all at once.  I'd start with buying back when the stock drops for stupid reasons and also buyback BIG on OPEX fridays.  That would really screw up market makers who tried to manipulate during monthly options expiration days.  They would need to buy back about 280,000,000 shares.  That's only about 28 trading days worth of volume.



 



Don't forget its the SHAREHOLDERS that own Apple.  Not Tim Cook.  Not the Board of Directors.  I'd love to see this proposal being voted on during the next annual meeting.  Let the SHAREHOLDERS decide.


 



I agree with you completely, but isn't the majority of Apple's cash held in overseas accounts? I think a relatively small portion is in the US - they can't repatriate the rest without paying taxes. So, they couldn't use a lot of their own money, ironically enough. They'd have to do a bond offering or something (which would still make sense for them).
post #49 of 85
Carl i-Con will be the death of Apple if he's left to run unchecked. I hope they completely ignore him.
post #50 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Why would a company use 90% of the cash they have to buy stock? That's STUPID. Apple has better things to do with that money.

They have money to invest and they have money to buy land, buildings, equipment, pay for research, have around just in case need to fend off a competitor.

 

Please educate yourself before you call other people stupid.  Especially self made multi-billionaires.  It would be like calling someone stupid for taking out a mortgage to buy a house.   Please stick to the facts.

 

Apple generates about $50B a year of free cash flow

Apple will have close to $180B at 12.31.13

Mr Icahn's plan is to borrow the $150B

The bonds will probably be around 15-20 year notes

15 years x $50B = $750B + $180B  =$930B

 

Apple can EASILY afford to float $150B note at 15 years

post #51 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

As a small shareholder of Apple (own about $150,000) I agree with Mr Icahn in theory.  Warren Buffet himself told Steve Jobs to buy back stock if he believed the shares were vastly undervalued.  So far Apple has bought back about $30B in shares and the stock has gone up about 15% since then.  That's about $5B they saved right there.

 

 

 

Looking at a 5 year cash flow perspective I see no problem with such a plan:

 

 

 

Cash at 6/30/13 - $150B

 

Cash at 12/31/13 - $180B

 

Less buyback - $150B

 

5 years @ $50B free cash flows per year

 

 

 

Cash at 12/31/18 -  $280B

 

 

 

That's almost enough money to buy Google.  Without an increased buyback the balance would be $400B.  That's totally ridiculous.  Keep in mind that IBM bought back about 40% of its shares in a 10 year period.  It's not unprecedented.  Just the dollar amounts seem so ridiculous because of Apple's size.

 

 

 

I do disagree on a tender offer.  I'd rather Apple buyback shares strategically instead of all at once.  I'd start with buying back when the stock drops for stupid reasons and also buyback BIG on OPEX fridays.  That would really screw up market makers who tried to manipulate during monthly options expiration days.  They would need to buy back about 280,000,000 shares.  That's only about 28 trading days worth of volume.

 

 

 

Don't forget its the SHAREHOLDERS that own Apple.  Not Tim Cook.  Not the Board of Directors.  I'd love to see this proposal being voted on during the next annual meeting.  Let the SHAREHOLDERS decide.

 



I agree with you completely, but isn't the majority of Apple's cash held in overseas accounts? I think a relatively small portion is in the US - they can't repatriate the rest without paying taxes. So, they couldn't use a lot of their own money, ironically enough. They'd have to do a bond offering or something (which would still make sense for them).

 

correct.  Probably 15-20 year bond at 3%.  After tax deductions and decrease in dividend payments Apple would be borrowing money for free.  We will probably get a tax holiday (repatriate cash at lower tax rates) within 10-15 years so Apple can easily pay back the note at the end of the term.  They generate $50B of free cash flow a year and about $15-$20B in the US alone.

post #52 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


I bought Apple when it was $65. So their success can be attributed to me.

 

Why is Carl Ichan worth $10,000,000,000?  The dude knows Wall Street and is a legendary investor.

post #53 of 85

This is win-win OPPORTUNITY for CI.

 

AAPL's going up with or without CI. CI knows this and only stands to gain by being an agitator. WIN - WIN for CI.

 

- CI identified what we ALL know is an undervalued stock.

- Apple's faces NO risk of failing (despite what the tech and financial press would have you believe).

- With LISTEN TO ME NOW shares in hand, CI's making a public demand that he fully realizes is simply a STARTING point.

- CI will NEGOTIATE an inevitable outcome that will ultimately only accelerate CI's eventual - and very profitable - EXIT.

 

As for me? I registered my own website: stopfuckingwithmyfutureicahn.com.


Edited by cherrypop - 10/24/13 at 11:45am
post #54 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

WTF is that cartoon supposed to represent?

Barbarians at the Gate ?   ;) 

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #55 of 85

Lets look at IBM. 

 

From 1995 to 2011 they have bought billions of stock.  In fact they have purchased 45% of their shares in that period.  Even though their revenue and profits have been flat the last 5 years the stock has gone up 250%.  Why?  Less outstanding shares and shareholders know the BOD is shareholder friendly.

post #56 of 85
All I had to read is this: "the result would be an immediate 33% boost to earnings per share, translating into a 33% increase in the value of the shares...."

Clearly, this is just another vulture trying to make a quick buck.
post #57 of 85
"Icahn got some great points. I hope Apples board listens, and issues a $150b tender offer at $525. Apple must invest in itself now, and reduce the share count by 30%. The $60b was a good start, now lets add another $150b. In a couple of years, Apples balance sheet will still hold more than $200 billion."

How does this benefit Apple though? Not being sarcastic, just curious because it doesn't seem to help Apple in any way, especially if they need to throw $150 billion at acquiring another company.
post #58 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Or instead of signing up for the square roundtable for exclusive access to this missive, we can read it in its entirety above (or skip over it as I did).

WTF is that cartoon supposed to represent?

 

Nothing. The only tyrant is that world-class criminal speculator called "Icahn" - now if only SJ were alive...he would definitely NOT afford his time to having such "dinners" with that kind of scum.

iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
post #59 of 85
Carl says that he would withhold his shares from the proposed tender offer%u2026

Of course he would. If Apple bought more APPL back from everyone else but Carl, wouldn't that just make his ownership % and clout with Apple that much stronger to influence what he wants done at Apple while making his value shares worth more?

It doesn't take an expert in mathematics to figure that one out.
post #60 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepondo View Post

"Icahn got some great points. I hope Apples board listens, and issues a $150b tender offer at $525. Apple must invest in itself now, and reduce the share count by 30%. The $60b was a good start, now lets add another $150b. In a couple of years, Apples balance sheet will still hold more than $200 billion."

How does this benefit Apple though? Not being sarcastic, just curious because it doesn't seem to help Apple in any way, especially if they need to throw $150 billion at acquiring another company.

 

They won't say goodbye to their $150B.  They would float a bond and still have the $150B cash. The bonds range from 10-20 years and Apple could easily pay it back since they generate $50B in cash a year.  The tax deduction and less dividend payments make borrowing money almost free. 

 

A buyback does not benefit Apple as a company.  But it benefits the OWNERS of the company the SHAREHOLDERS.  Each shareholder would have a bigger piece of the pie.  Apple makes about $40B in profits and that pie would be split among 600M shares instead of 900M.

post #61 of 85

Icahn does have some valid points.  And the shareholders do own Apple.

 

But there is a difference in being an investor and a speculator.   Wall Street used to be about investing in companies for long-term growth and investment returns, not making a quick buck on the movement of the stock price up or down.

 

I wonder if Icahn would be willing to accept a buyback plan that stipulates shareholders with a large stake in Apple to be required to hold their stock for one year after the buyback and not cash out after the buyback raises the per share price?  

post #62 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

As a small shareholder of Apple (own about $150,000) I agree with Mr Icahn in theory.  Warren Buffet himself told Steve Jobs to buy back stock if he believed the shares were vastly undervalued.  So far Apple has bought back about $30B in shares and the stock has gone up about 15% since then.  That's about $5B they saved right there. .....

 

 

As an investor, you're no doubt aware of the phrase ... don't put all of your eggs in one basket. Icahn wants Apple to "invest in itself"  .... Bullshit ! ... What Icahn wants is Apple to invest in Icahn, period. Apple is already buying back shares in a well thought out and logical plan with minimal risk to its "cash hoard".  It makes more sense for Apple to use that cash to invest in itself by continuing to do what they do best.  Innovate, design and market the very best products that they can. They continue to build the company by building new infrastructure, buying small innovative tech companies and keeping a safe cushion of cash to allow itself to always be in a position to expand without the need to go into debt. 

 

In this very volatile economy, who can predict, with any certainty, the economic future ?  We still haven't "solved" all of the problems that created the last meltdown ... world currencies continue to lose value (in real terms) and idiots like Icahn wants Apple to borrow the equivalent of it's total cash balance to what end ? .... increase the value of his investment?  I think predators like Icahn should be held in the same esteem that you would have for any other "snake in the grass". Go away, Icahn ... you may be appreciated somewhere .... but not here.

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #63 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Icahn does have some valid points.  And the shareholders do own Apple.

But there is a difference in being an investor and a speculator.   Wall Street used to be about investing in companies for long-term growth and investment returns, not making a quick buck on the movement of the stock price up or down.

I wonder if Icahn would be willing to accept a buyback plan that stipulates shareholders with a large stake in Apple to be required to hold their stock for one year after the buyback and not cash out after the buyback raises the per share price?  
What drove Apple's stock price down was panic on the part of fund managers and large institutional holders, who dropped there AAPL holdings by about 1/3. All Mr. Icahn is suggesting is that Apple take advantage of their herd mentality to do what Apple intends to do anyway much, much faster, thus hugely magnifying the "bang per buck" and buying back a lot more shares for the money.

He's right.
post #64 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Why is Carl Ichan worth $10,000,000,000?  The dude knows Wall Street and is a legendary investor.

I'm not saying he's an idiot. But the stock/company's success shouldn't be attributed to him. He's along for the ride while trying to suck out every dime for himself.
post #65 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by firhill07 View Post

He has a point in technical terms and his objective is very clear.  As much as I want to believe that Apple has good plan to invest the money for strategic reasons, its hard to conceive why a company like Apple would need such a huge pile of cash. The fact that Cook and Oppenheimer met with him indicates to me that they are running out of ideas/opportunities to put that money to good use.
You fools! 😉 what do you think they are going to use to fuel the Spaceship campus? That sucker will only be in Cupertino until they have enough cash to propel it into orbit.
post #66 of 85
You play by the book. Apple writes it.

Go play somewhere else
post #67 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

I'd just like to know why Google doesn't have to do anything to make its stock rise to $1200 a share and yet Apple has to bribe everyone on Wall Street just to get to $600 a share.

CEOs don't set their their company's share price; the market does. Why don't you ask the market?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #68 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by firhill07 View Post
 

" My firm's success and my expertise as an investor would be difficult for anyone to argue."

Of course, we know that you want to increase 1/2 percent share in the company to 1% without adding any more cash and do it immediately.

 

"I hereby agree to withhold my shares from the proposed $150 Billion tender offer."

Of course, as soon as the share price jumps,  you would be more than happy to take it off the table.

 

"There is nothing short term about my intentions here."

We know, your long term commitment is anywhere from 6-12 months.

 

He has a point in technical terms and his objective is very clear.  As much as I want to believe that Apple has good plan to invest the money for strategic reasons, its hard to conceive why a company like Apple would need such a huge pile of cash. The fact that Cook and Oppenheimer met with him indicates to me that they are running out of ideas/opportunities to put that money to good use.

 

Apple will need the money on the day the bubble bursts for Google, Netflix, Amazon, Priceline, and Facebook, fundamentals do matter over the long haul.

post #69 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


I'm not saying he's an idiot. But the stock/company's success shouldn't be attributed to him. He's along for the ride while trying to suck out every dime for himself.

 

The idiots are the people usually small investors, who listen to these guys Jamie Dymon, Bain inc.., Hedge Funds and Carl Icahn are parasites. 

post #70 of 85

Disclosure: I'm an Apple investor.

 

 

Apple is buying back some shares, that's good. But what I'd rather see is Apple making strategic investments in the future using that massive cash hoard.

 

Have Apple Worldwide Inc fund Apple Silicon Inc (a subsidiary of Apple Inc) to create their own fab here in the US (thus avoiding taxes on moving the money). Hire away as many Intel engineers as you can get your hands on. It would be a long-term project, but if you look at the battery life difference between the old and new MacBook Airs, then think about an iPad with the A7 on an Apple-owned 14nm process instead of the current Samsung 28nm process then you can see the potential of a 24 hour battery life instead of 10 hours, and it's something your competitors can't match without an equal investment.

 

Or maybe look at buying QualComm so you own the cellular technology; maybe sell off some of the other parts of the business to recoup some of the investment.

 

Maybe you do try to undercut Google... hire some really good engineers and make iAds available on all platforms (including the web) and try to steal some of Google's revenue.

 

They certainly need to grow their cloud/services/server teams. Imagine if iCloud were available as an SDK across platforms, where I could have my web UI hook into the same back end as my iOS app with minimal effort, hosted by Apple for a monthly fee.  They could also invest in maps, buying Tom Tom or someone else, and really putting the boots on the ground to catch up with Google Maps.

 

They could invest in better repair/services (which would greatly appeal to enterprises). Offer same-day repair or swap of any Apple hardware in major cities, next-day elsewhere. People already want the mac hardware, you could do a lot to erase IT anti-Mac feelings by building a top-notch service organization. You could even offer something like $59 home visits for AppleCare+ members to have someone come help you with your Mac/iPhone/iPad at home. For that matter, hire a couple of AD/LDAP experts and offer your own Group Policy snapins for AD. That would make Macs much better corporate citizens and demand from employees (especially execs) would override the pricing objections. Imagine Apple starting to steal Windows revenue from enterprises... that would stick in Microsoft's craw.

 

 

 

There are a thousand different things they could be doing with that cash to make themselves indispensable to customers, improve areas they fail at currently (eg: Cloud services), or make investments for future competitive advantages. Investing $150B in safe bonds is not a good strategy, and Apple needs to get on with it.

post #71 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post
 

 

Nothing. The only tyrant is that world-class criminal speculator called "Icahn" - now if only SJ were alive...he would definitely NOT afford his time to having such "dinners" with that kind of scum.

 

You are right why have dinner or take calls from people like him makes absolutely no sense, Tim Cook has enabled this guy. 

post #72 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danox View Post

You are right why have dinner or take calls from people like him makes absolutely no sense, Tim Cook has enabled this guy. 

If an individual has that many shares, public CEOs have an obligation to meet with him/her. I'm pretty sure Carl doesn't need an enabler.
post #73 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

If an individual has that many shares, public CEOs have an obligation to meet with him/her.

Really? Where does it say that?

post #74 of 85
Um, hell no?

"Icahn admitted that such a buyback would be "unprecedented" in size, he feels it would be appropriate because of the relative size and strength of Apple."

And Apple's size and strength and healthy position wouldn't be disastrously ruined by stripping $150 billion out of its cash position?

The guy is really saying, "We want ALL of your cash NOW! Hand it over, or else...!"

And this, because he simply decided one day to buy a billion dollars worth of stock, and wants to leverage a huge gain. I guarantee he'd be making a FORTUNE on the 2 ~ 3 million shares he bought at way less than $525 a share.

I suggest that, rather than try and force Apple to buy back shares, why not just sell the ones he has at THE SAME PRICE (see today's share price), and be done with it? Why HASSLE Apple management about it at all?
post #75 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Apple stock is totally stagnant and there has to be some practical way to get it moving up again. If Google and Amazon can do it, so should Apple be able to find a way.

 

Wait, Apple stock has gained about 15% over the past month (and trending up overall) and you call that "totally stagnant"? Not moving up? Wha...?

 

Maybe a year ago. Keep current, man!

 

As for the rest of your conjecture, thinking you know "what's best for Apple's strategy ahead", I think I'll trust the current execs who seem to be doing a FINE job keeping that ship on course.

 

About the only things I agreed with in your post were the "Icahn can go to hell" sentiment and the idea that more focus on improved dividends will attract the right kind of investor, and/or provide more (balanced) benefit to the smaller cap investor.

post #76 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Really? Where does it say that?

I think it's more of a "don't piss off your wealthy shareholders" policy than anything.
post #77 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


I think it's more of a "don't piss off your wealthy shareholders" policy than anything.

 

That would be the thinking at Blackberry. Not Apple.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #78 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by aderutter View Post

I fail to see what benefit Apple would get from this buyback scheme.

I like that Apple has a large war chest of security, am not interested in Apple throwing this away just to get a bigger valuation on my AAPL shares. I bought AAPL because I love Apple long-term, not to make money short-term.

Is there even a cast-iron guarantee that AAPL shares would go up in value? I wouldn't be surprised if the market priced in any EPS share increase and the share price hardly moved, (or moved up then back down again).

And why exactly should AAPL try to increase shareholder value anyway? How does that benefit Apple?

Tim Cook should just ignore this self-serving money-grabbing f-wit.

Go take a Econ class and you will understand what Icahn is saying. Those who doesn't think he is making sense really have no business investing
post #79 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

This is bad for Apple, Icahn is only interested in lining his pockets, the fact he suggest Apple go into debt if needed to to buy back more stock more quickly proves that. He does not care if Apple is making the right investments with its money or whether the company is doing all the right thing to grow the company, he is only interesting in making sure the stock value goes up. As we seen there is a much larger group who have been trying to drive the stock value down as fast as possible since they make money on the down side. Icahn is attempting to drive the stock up quickly so to drive out the people who are shorting the stock to drive its value down.

Icahn has screwed every company he go involved with, he did not make it better for investors he made it better for him.

Are you dumb? If Icahn lines his pockets by making shares go up, that lines your pockets too! I mean sometimes I think people are just too stupid for their own good
post #80 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by atsysusa View Post

Carl Icahn is NOT an investor - he is a corporate raider. His role in the demise of TWA has already been mentioned. His game plan: 1) buy enough stock in a company that has cash on hand to be elected to the Board of Directors; 2) control the Board by bringing on 'associates;' 3) break up the company and sell the component parts for more cash; 4) leave the empty shell behind; 5) claim success for stockholders; i.e., himself and friends.

btw - 'investors' contribute nothing to the company whose stock they buy - unless they are buying treasure shares. The money goes to the seller - not the company.

Carl Icahn's behavior is a principal reason the 'poison pill' was invented.

Poison pill is also invented by fat cat CEO continue to make millions while not interested in creating shareholder value. Icahn is right here and those of you citing Twa and things like corporate raider are believing too much in fat cat CEOs who want to keep making their fat check and not be questioned about stock performance. I don't want to be a a sukker sorry
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Carl Icahn urges Apple to make immediate tender offer for $150B in stock