or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Tim Cook to shareholders: iPhone 5s & 5c outpace predecessors, Apple bought 23 companies in 16 months
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tim Cook to shareholders: iPhone 5s & 5c outpace predecessors, Apple bought 23 companies in 16...

post #1 of 95
Thread Starter 
Apple's chief executive Tim Cook sat alone onstage as he presided over the company's annual shareholder meeting, fielding questions and detailing various aspects of his company's business. Among the topics he discussed were sales of the latest iPhone models, Apple's pace of acquisitions, and the growth of Apple TV.



An initial official corporate meeting session asked the company's shareholders to approve the reelection of members of the Board of Directors, ratify the appointment of its accounting firm and approve a series of 'good governance' corporate Articles amendments delayed from the previous year (all of which were approved by a 90 percent or greater landslide in preliminary votes).

There were also a series of outside shareholder proposals ranging from an idea to create a special board committee to advise the company on human rights issues; a request to "report involvement with certain trade organizations" motivated by political goal; a suggestion to allow shareholding groups to nominate their own board members; and a new proposal backed by the EFF asking for a corporate response to NSA surveillance issues (all of the ideas were soundly rejected in the initial count of votes).

Once the official business completed, Cook recited a broad range of prepared remarks and took questions from the audience. He also noted that within the next 60 days, Apple's board would announce the results of deliberations on adjustments to the company's dividend and stock buyback programs.

Cook reviews 2013



Starting with the new MacBook Air, Cook called attention to a series of developments since the last shareholder meeting. He stated that reviews had called the machine the "best laptop ever made," and observed that its "fantastic all-day battery life" was the result of everyone at Apple moving "in the same direction to pull this off," from battery chemistry and other aspects of hardware design to the software and implementation of services.

Cook also addressed the launch of the iPhone 5c and 5s, noting that the two phones both outsold Apple's previous products in the middle tier and the high end, a moderate rebuke of reports that have insisted that the iPhone 5c is a "failure" for not having sold even better than it did. He called particular attention to Touch ID, stating that it has been "incredibly well received."

Cook also mentioned the company's new A7 Application Processor, noting that Apple has invested in silicon expertise to the point where he believed the company now operates a world leading chip design facility. He also called attention to Apple being first to put a 64-bit architecture in a mobile phone, providing power to run "desktop class" applications.

The new iOS 7 got a mention, with particular attention given to the fact that 82 percent of Apple's users were now on the latest release, compared to just 1.8 percent among the "others," a clear jab at Google's Android. iTunes Radio and iPad Air also got glowing mentions.

Cook also made specific mention of Apple TV, which he noted generated $1 billion in revenue in 2013, adding that it's now "hard to call it a hobby these days."

And amid a PC market that is retracting, Cook drew attention to the fact that Mac sales had grown by 19 percent. Overall, Apple's $171 billion in revenue, $14.4 billion in growth and $58 billion in profits were higher than any tech company has ever reported, comparable only to companies pumping oil.

For a sense of scale, Cook also compared Apple's Services and Software business, which generated $16 billion in revenue in 2013, to Starbucks, a company that just reported the best year in its 42-year history.

BRIC and brag



Cook had first suggested he would announce new products during the event, before pausing after wild applause to note that he had only been joking. He did however note that Apple's research and development spending had ballooned by 32 percent in 2013, despite already being a big number.

Over the past roughly 16 months, Cook also noted Apple had acquired 23 companies, but added that the company was not in a race to buy up the greatest number of firms or to pay the most money for them, a quip that appeared to be directed at Facebook's breathtakingly expensive purchase of WhatsApp or the similarly vast (and in retrospect, disastrous) purchase of Motorola Mobility by Google.

Cook also focused attention on Apple's growth, and investments, with BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China), noting that in 2010 Apple recorded $4 billion in BRIC revenues, while last year that had grown to $30 billion. He also called attention to China Mobile, noting that Apple had focused its launch on 4G service in just 17 cities, but expected to expand that to 200 markets there by the end of 2014.

Cook added that Apple now has 800 million iOS users and has handled over 16 trillion push notifications, with 40 billion new ones occurring every day. Apple also delivers several billion iMessages and FaceTime requests every day. Cook added that iPad now accounts for 78 percent of all tablets used throughout the enterprise.

Social responsibility



Cook also spent significant time discussing Apple's work in being social responsible, including the $100 million that the company was donating to ConnectEd to bring technology to disadvantaged U.S. school districts, and the $70 million Apple had donated to Project(RED) in addition to the $50 million raised by the company's design chief Jony Ive at a charity auction benefit.Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."

Apple's aim in environmental issues is to "leave the world better than we found it," Cook said, detailing plans to achieve 100 percent renewable power across the company, including the construction of the largest solar installation built and owned by a private, non utility company.

Cook said Apple's environmental efforts also made economic sense, but when challenged by conservative shareholder activism group to pledge that Apple wouldn't do anything related to the environment that didn't follow a clear profit motive, Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."

And while Cook stated that he didn't support specific shareholder proposals or certain outside ideas about how to best address human rights issues, he took personal issue with the comments some parties were advancing at the meeting, stating that Apple has taken a leadership position in human rights, taking on tough problems and "shining a flashlight on them" in an effort to affect change and push other tech companies to follow its lead.

US manufacturing and Apple Campus 2



Two final questions fielded by Cook focused on Apple's work to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. and the status of the company's new Campus 2 headquarters, which he said would serve as an "innovation center for decades."

Regarding U.S. manufacturing, Cook specifically mentioned Mac Pro manufacturing in Austin, Texas, and new sapphire production underway in Arizona, although he sidestepped any details about the nature or use of that new sapphire production.

Cook also said that construction of Campus 2 is rapidly progressing following final approvals from the city of Cupertino in November, adding that Apple plans to occupy the new complex by 2016. Cook invited shareholders to attend the 2017 meeting scheduled to be held in larger facilities at the new complex, which wouldn't require outside overflow seating to accommodate all who wanted to attend.
post #2 of 95
INteresting....
post #3 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
.... company's shareholders to approve the reelection of members of the Board of Directors,....

I am disappointed that the same board continues, esp. Campbell, Gore, and Jung.

post #4 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
Cook also addressed the launch of the iPhone 5c and 5s, noting that the two phones both outsold Apple's previous products in the middle tier and the high end, a moderate rebuke of reports that have insisted that the iPhone 5c is a "failure" for not having sold even better than it did. He called particular attention to Touch ID, stating that it has been "incredibly well received."

What previous middle-end products? 

post #5 of 95
I'm thrilled the same board is intact.
Quote:
Over the past roughly 16 months, Cook also noted Apple had acquired 23 companies, but added that the company was not in a race to buy up the greatest number of firms or to pay the most money for them, a quip that appeared to be directed at Facebook's breathtakingly expensive purchase of WhatsApp or the similarly vast (and in retrospect, disastrous) purchase of Motorola Mobility by Google.

More a quip of late to tell Tesla fans that Apple doesn't spend billions on any single acquisition.
post #6 of 95
Loved this part.

... "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #7 of 95
Why would anyone be thrilled about Al Gore on the board? WTF does he know about business or technology?
post #8 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Loved this part.

... "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."
Yeah I'm fine with that as long as it's not increasing prices. I don't want to pay more for something because Apple feels it needs to pander to the environmental lobby.
post #9 of 95

Priceless ...

 

~~Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."

 

 

Then again, I guess Tim and The Gang have had enough and the War with Wall Street Dumb Fatties has begun!

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply
post #10 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post
 

What previous middle-end products? 

Cook was comparing iPhone 5c results to sales of the iPhone 4S when it occupied the middle tier.

post #11 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Cook said Apple's environmental efforts also made economic sense, but when challenged by conservative shareholder activism group to pledge that Apple wouldn't do anything related to the environment that didn't follow a clear profit motive, Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."

That's the way to tell them. I just hope the majority of Apple's stockholders align with Apple's core values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan 
Why would anyone be thrilled about Al Gore on the board? WTF does he know about business or technology?

"The Internet began to find its way well beyond the scientific community by the late 1980’s.
A second development occurred around this time, namely, then-Senator Al Gore, a strong and knowledgeable proponent of the Internet, promoted legislation that resulted in President George Bush signing the High Performance Computing and Communication act of 1991. This Act allocated $600 million for high performance computing and for the creation of the National Research and Education Network [13-14]. The NREN brought together industry, academia and government in a joint effort to accelerate the development and deployment of gigabit/sec networking."

http://web.archive.org/web/20070722223308/http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/PS/paper224.pdf
post #12 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post
 

What previous middle-end products? 

The older iPhones. In this case, iPhone 4/4S.


Apple doesn't want to sell the older devices as they drag on the development of iOS. So, as they continue to improve the manufacturing of the C series to make it much cheaper, they'll eventually switch to stop selling iPhone 4S and replace it with iPhone 5C at the much lower prices. 

post #13 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I am disappointed that the same board continues, esp. Campbell, Gore, and Jung.

i'm not particularly happy about the entire board, either, but i don't have a big enough piggy bank to buy more shares and vote them out. all i can do is vote my shares.

plus, i trust apple and the board more than i trust any other company in the known universe (and that includes the pleiades system).
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #14 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post

What previous middle-end products? 

Hes referring to the past couple of years where previous models were still on sale even if with limited storage

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #15 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Why would anyone be thrilled about Al Gore on the board? WTF does he know about business or technology?

 

Didn't he invent the internet? :no:

 

And I too would like to know why he's on Apple's board. What does he contribute to Apple? What are his qualifications? And how can Apple justify paying him the obscene amount that they do? 

 

I am especially skeptical of any politicians on company boards.  

post #16 of 95
"Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock.""

Aimed at Icahn and his acolytes.
post #17 of 95
My guess is for his "Enviornmental Face & to "advise" Apple on their green initiatives
post #18 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

Didn't he invent the internet? :no:

 

And I too would like to know why he's on Apple's board. What does he contribute to Apple? What are his qualifications? And how can Apple justify paying him the obscene amount that they do? 

 

I am especially skeptical of any politicians on company boards.  

Other than Tim Cook and Al Gore whom you personally dislike, why are all the following on the board of directors?

Once you answer that, I may then share your skepticism.

 

Arthur Levinson
Chairman and former CEO
Genentech, Inc.

 

William Campbell
Chairman and former CEO
Intuit, Inc.

 

Tim Cook
CEO
Apple

 

Millard Drexler
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
J. Crew

 

Al Gore
Former Vice President of the United States

 

Robert Iger
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
The Walt Disney Company

 

Andrea Jung
Senior Advisor to the Board of Directors
Avon Products, Inc.

 

Ronald Sugar
Former Chairman and CEO
Northrop Grumman Corporation

post #19 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDBA View Post
 

Other than Tim Cook and Al Gore whom you personally dislike, why are all the following on the board of directors?

Once you answer that, I may then share your skepticism.

 

Arthur Levinson
Chairman and former CEO
Genentech, Inc.

 

William Campbell
Chairman and former CEO
Intuit, Inc.

 

Tim Cook
CEO
Apple

 

Millard Drexler
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
J. Crew

 

Al Gore
Former Vice President of the United States

 

Robert Iger
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
The Walt Disney Company

 

Andrea Jung
Senior Advisor to the Board of Directors
Avon Products, Inc.

 

Ronald Sugar
Former Chairman and CEO
Northrop Grumman Corporation

 

You're absolutely right that I have a personal dislike of Al Gore.

 

As for the others, I admit to being ignorant as to how company boards work and what their purpose is supposed to be. I don't even know how many times a year Apple's board meets. You'd figure that with all of the money that they're getting paid, they'd at least have to make some sort of effort, but I honestly don't know, and I also don't know if everybody on Apple's board deserves to be there. An Avon lady?

 

It sure seems like a nice gig, if you can get it. It's like winning the lottery.

post #20 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Didn't he invent the internet? 1oyvey.gif

And I too would like to know why he's on Apple's board. What does he contribute to Apple? What are his qualifications? And how can Apple justify paying him the obscene amount that they do? 

I am especially skeptical of any politicians on company boards.  
I see now this silly group released a press release claiming Tim Cook told investors to "drop dead". Do they really think Cook was going to say Apple only cares about the environment if it's good for the bottom line? Of course not. But all they have to do is look at Apple's profits to know that their environmental work isn't at the expense of profits.
post #21 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

i'm not particularly happy about the entire board, either, but i don't have a big enough piggy bank to buy more shares and vote them out. all i can do is vote my shares.

plus, i trust apple and the board more than i trust any other company in the known universe (and that includes the pleiades system).

My issues with these three, specifically, are with the fact that Gore's presence has meant little for Apple in DC (witness the DoJ nonsense), Jung has essentially been fired by her own company, and Campbell's Intuit does little (and almost no innovation) for OSX/iOS users.

post #22 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

I am especially skeptical of any politicians on company boards.  

I am not. It's really useful for a company of Apple's size and scope if someone can successfully navigate that cesspool, Washington, DC.

post #23 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

You're absolutely right that I have a personal dislike of Al Gore.

 

As for the others, I admit to being ignorant as to how company boards work and what their purpose is supposed to be. I don't even know how many times a year Apple's board meets. You'd figure that with all of the money that they're getting paid, they'd at least have to make some sort of effort, but I honestly don't know, and I also don't know if everybody on Apple's board deserves to be there. An Avon lady?

 

It sure seems like a nice gig, if you can get it. It's like winning the lottery.


All this list shows me is how the corporate world is inter twined and how they're all looking out for each other. How the corporate system may f*cked up however, is a whole different topic.

post #24 of 95

Apple is winning.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #25 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

I am not. It's really useful for a company of Apple's size and scope if someone can successfully navigate that cesspool, Washington, DC.

 

As you wrote in your post above, Gore being a former Vice President of the US, hasn't seemed to benefit them all that much (DOJ vs Apple).

post #26 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDBA View Post
 

Other than Tim Cook and Al Gore whom you personally dislike, why are all the following on the board of directors?

Once you answer that, I may then share your skepticism.

 

Arthur Levinson
Chairman and former CEO
Genentech, Inc.

 

William Campbell
Chairman and former CEO
Intuit, Inc.

 

Tim Cook
CEO
Apple

 

Millard Drexler
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
J. Crew

 

Al Gore
Former Vice President of the United States

 

Robert Iger
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
The Walt Disney Company

 

Andrea Jung
Senior Advisor to the Board of Directors
Avon Products, Inc.

 

Ronald Sugar
Former Chairman and CEO
Northrop Grumman Corporation

 

A break down of the board.

 

Arthur Levinson - Highly influential in the medical field. He's no longer at Genentech. He is at Calico now, which incidentally is a Google venture. A little iffy keeping him on the BoD.

 

William Campbell - He is highly regarded in the Valley. He was a personal confidant to Steve Jobs. He has also been involved in Apple in various capacities since the 80s.

 

Millard Drexler - Very influential in retail. Grew Gap and now J. Crew to great heights. Has been a part of Apple since 1999.

 

Al Gore - Besides being the former Vice President, he has been involved in sustainability worldwide. Probably still has some political clout.

 

Robert Iger - Walt Disney is one of the largest media companies in the world. Having the CEO of such a influential company on your board can't hurt. Walt Disney also owns ESPN, which is the largest sports broadcaster and that could play into future Apple TV stuff.

 

Andrea Jung - Influential female executive, who sits on the board of GE and now Daimler's supervisory board.

 

Ronald Sugar - NGC is one of the largest defense contractors in the world and having someone who understands the nature of that part of the government, is important.

 

With all that being said, I am sure everyone plays a role in Apple's success. We all are sitting on the outside and don't know all the back room stuff that goes on.

 

The only questionable one now is Arthur Levinson, although I don't think he could be as bad an Apple as Eric Schmidt was. Andrea Jung is also kind of weird, but who would replace her?


Edited by foad - 2/28/14 at 3:27pm
post #27 of 95
Two board members needs to be kicked out Gore and one more so that room for genius and great people can be made. How about Elon Musk and Burberry lady Andrea 1cool.gif
post #28 of 95
Al Gore's our choice was a really excelent example of e-book interactiveity.

Long FB, AMZN
Schlong AAPL

Reply

Long FB, AMZN
Schlong AAPL

Reply
post #29 of 95
Too bad Apple chose not to agree on the human rights group and, maybe even more of a problem for them at the movement, on a response to the NSA scandal.
post #30 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

Too bad Apple chose not to agree on the human rights group and, maybe even more of a problem for them at the movement, on a response to the NSA scandal.

Apple already does a relatively amazing job in human rights. It doesn't need another group.

As for the NSA, they probably aren't allowed to comment.
post #31 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Why would anyone be thrilled about Al Gore on the board? WTF does he know about business or technology?

Been living under a rock. Republicrats are very good, and the people are easily persuaded, that the truth is a lie and a lie is the truth. John Kerry, as war hero, was made to look like a lier, while a draft dodger, Bush, was made to look like a hero. Maybe you and others like you will finally stop the crap. So I've included in full, the statement sent by the two main and acknowledged contributors to the Internet, Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf on this matter. I'm doubtful facts will persuade you, but perhaps others will prefer facts over propaganda:

 

----

Al Gore and the Internet

 

By Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf

Dated: 28 Sep 2000

 

Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development. 

 

No one person or even small group of persons exclusively invented the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore’s contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President.  No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time.   

 

Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role.  He said: “During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”  We don’t think, as some people have argued, that Gore intended to claim he invented the Internet. Moreover, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore’s initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening.  We feel it is timely to offer our perspective.

 

As far back as the 1970s Congressman Gore promoted the idea of high speed telecommunications as an engine for both economic growth and the improvement of our educational system.  He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship. Though easily forgotten, now, at the time this was an unproven and controversial concept.  Our work on the Internet started in 1973 and was based on even earlier work that took place in the mid-late 1960s. But the Internet, as we know it today, was not deployed until 1983. When the Internet was still in the early stages of its deployment, Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication.  As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises.

 

As a Senator in the 1980s Gore urged government agencies to consolidate what at the time were several dozen different and unconnected networks into an Interagency Network.  Working in a bi-partisan manner with officials in Ronald Reagan and George Bush’s administrations, Gore secured the passage of the High Performance Computing and Communications Act in 1991.  This Gore Act supported the National Research and Education Network (NREN) initiative that became one of the major vehicles for the spread of the Internet beyond the field of computer science.

 

As Vice President Gore promoted building the Internet both up and out, as well as releasing the Internet from the control of the government agencies that spawned it.  He served as the major administration proponent for continued investment in advanced computing and networking and private sector initiatives such as Net Day. He was and is a strong proponent of extending access to the network to schools and libraries.  Today, approximately 95% of our nations schools are on the Internet. Gore provided much-needed political support for the speedy privatization of the Internet when the time arrived for it to become a commercially-driven operation.

 

There are many factors that have contributed to the Internet’s rapid growth since the later 1980s, not the least of which has been political support for its privatization and continued support for research in advanced networking technology.  No one in public life has been more intellectually engaged in helping to create the climate for a thriving Internet than the Vice President.  Gore has been a clear champion of this effort, both in the councils of government and with the public at large.  

 

The Vice President deserves credit for his early recognition of the value of high speed computing and communication and for his long-term and consistent articulation of the potential value of the Internet to American citizens and industry and, indeed, to the rest of the world. 

 

post #32 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Cook said Apple's environmental efforts also made economic sense, but when challenged by conservative shareholder activism group to pledge that Apple wouldn't do anything related to the environment that didn't follow a clear profit motive, Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," and recommended that anyone who had a problem with that "should get out of the stock."

That's the way to tell them. I just hope the majority of Apple's stockholders align with Apple's core values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan 
Why would anyone be thrilled about Al Gore on the board? WTF does he know about business or technology?

"The Internet began to find its way well beyond the scientific community by the late 1980’s.
A second development occurred around this time, namely, then-Senator Al Gore, a strong and knowledgeable proponent of the Internet, promoted legislation that resulted in President George Bush signing the High Performance Computing and Communication act of 1991. This Act allocated $600 million for high performance computing and for the creation of the National Research and Education Network [13-14]. The NREN brought together industry, academia and government in a joint effort to accelerate the development and deployment of gigabit/sec networking."

http://web.archive.org/web/20070722223308/http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/PS/paper224.pdf

Thank you Marvin.

post #33 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

I am not. It's really useful for a company of Apple's size and scope if someone can successfully navigate that cesspool, Washington, DC.

 

As you wrote in your post above, Gore being a former Vice President of the US, hasn't seemed to benefit them all that much (DOJ vs Apple).

How do you know it hasn't benefitted them? Things could be a lot worse.

post #34 of 95
800 million users.

40 billion notifications per day.

That makes 500 000 notifications per second.

One notification per user per half hour approximately. Sounds right.
post #35 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

More a quip of late to tell Tesla fans that Apple doesn't spend billions on any single acquisition.

Except $12b on a stock buyback that has all but vanished is better? The benefits of that may become apparent in future but all spending is done for growth. They could easily spend the same amount of money on the buyback they are going to anyway and give them to Tesla investors during a takeover rather than retire them. What's the difference? The risk of retiring the shares is that it has negligible difference to their company value, same as with Tesla. The reward from a buyback to the company itself is pretty much zero, some minor savings in future dividend payments, the main reward is to existing stockholders, eventually. The reward from revolutionising the mass-market transport system with your brand is much more rewarding. If they're going to burn $24b anyway, I say it might as well be used on something with strong growth potential.
post #36 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by helicopterben View Post

Two board members needs to be kicked out Gore and one more so that room for genius and great people can be made. How about Elon Musk and Burberry lady Andrea 1cool.gif

 

How do you know Al Gore isn't a positive influence to Apple? I'm not saying he is or isn't, but to categorically state that he should be shown the door without having insight into the inner workings of Apple, is weird.

post #37 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

Too bad Apple chose not to agree on the human rights group and, maybe even more of a problem for them at the movement, on a response to the NSA scandal.

 

Apple is actually a leader in human rights issues amongst its peers. Their annual supplier responsibility reports get more and more detailed every year. They continue to push better practices without the need for additional bureaucracy.

post #38 of 95
Sounds like the same speech Cook gave at last years annual meeting. He mentions Apple sold more iPads, iPhones, and iPads, than ever before but neglects to mention that growth in these segments has been on a multi-year downward spiral, year-over-year, for the the past two years, after several years of exponential growth. That's why AAPL was valued over 30% higher two years ago.

Cook warned investors who don't like his style to get out of the stock and the moment he opened his trap AAPL slipped from green into red in a up market on yet another record day. Cook brags about a billion FaceTime and iMessage requests but Apple doesn't seem to have a clue how to monetize it or all the other valuable data Apple has access to but doesn't make a cent off.

The only "real" solid good news to come out o this year's meeting is the BRIC growth numbers. Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," because under Cook's management Apple's trajectory has shriveled. We need new product lines and killer apps Tim, not your snarky quips!
post #39 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobSchlob View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

As you wrote in your post above, Gore being a former Vice President of the US, hasn't seemed to benefit them all that much (DOJ vs Apple).

How do you know it hasn't benefitted them? Things could be a lot worse.

That's certainly possible.

 

Care to name a possible example?

post #40 of 95
1smoking.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

Sounds like the same speech Cook gave at last years annual meeting. He mentions Apple sold more iPads, iPhones, and iPads, than ever before but neglects to mention that growth in these segments has been on a multi-year downward spiral, year-over-year, for the the past two years, after several years of exponential growth. That's why AAPL was valued over 30% higher two years ago.

Cook warned investors who don't like his style to get out of the stock and the moment he opened his trap AAPL slipped from green into red in a up market on yet another record day. Cook brags about a billion FaceTime and iMessage requests but Apple doesn't seem to have a clue how to monetize it or all the other valuable data Apple has access to but doesn't make a cent off.

The only "real" solid good news to come out o this year's meeting is the BRIC growth numbers. Cook bristled with a reply that "we do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," because under Cook's management Apple's trajectory has shriveled. We need new product lines and killer apps Tim, not your snarky quips!
Yeah I'm sure a CEO is going to show up at a shareholders meeting and highlight bad figures. 1oyvey.gif Of course Cook is going to highlight the positives. And I'm perfectly happy with Apple not making money off my use of FaceTime and iMessages. The minute Apple becomes Google is the minute I stop using their products.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Tim Cook to shareholders: iPhone 5s & 5c outpace predecessors, Apple bought 23 companies in 16 months