Boards of Directors are supposed to look after the broad interests of the shareholders, and I think they should also be looking out for the long term health of the company.
If and to the extent that the long-term health of the company is in opposition to the interests of the shareholders, then the long-term health of the company should be ignored.
For example, with some companies, it is best for the owners to liquidate and sell all the pieces to the highest bidders. In such cases, the long-term health of the company is not important.
Companies like Apple exist to generate shareholder value. If a Board member has deviant goals, that is a huge problem.
The owners of Apple, the Hedge Funds and Pension Plans, will decide how Apple WILL work. They will do it by appointing a BOD.
They will try. But like all the groups wanting this or that from Apple, it will take a shareholder vote. And do you really think that they can find enough support for the PR nightmare of voting no confidence in Steve's board and Steve's chosen successor. Maybe if they bomb this iPhone release and the next iPad. But right now, likely not
I have no doubt that Apple could continue to do very well creating wonderful devices for a very long time. BUT... I am afraid that won't happen due to the greed and stupidity of the Apple Board of Directors. I expect infighting, etc. I hope this isn't true, but I truly don't expect Apple to be as great as it once was. Jobs was able to keep these people in line, but will the CEO be able to do the same thing?
Jobs created an Apple culture which will guide the leaders of the company and it's products for a long time.
Instead of spewing your greed and stupidity crap here, you should grab a sign with a real dumb slogan and go join the Occupiers.
I will think differently about Apple's direction when Algore is gone from the board.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
A recipe for disaster.
Apple didn't get to where it is due to a meddling, over-involved BOD.
The Board needs to offer all it's support to Tim and his team, and then stand back and refrain from fucking things up.
If and to the extent that the long-term health of the company is in opposition to the interests of the shareholders, then the long-term health of the company should be ignored.
Yes, you make a very good point, but I think there is a lot of grey area here. How you define the interests of the shareholders is the question.
The board and the shareholders are Apple's single worst enemy now.
Maybe it's time to use all that cash to take Apple private.
All this FUD. What are you trying to do? Depress the stock price so you can short it?
Really, nobody has any idea what the board has been like and what they will be like in the future. These and other analysts had absolutely no say in how Apple was run when Steve was there, and they have no say now. Making suggestions or offering advice means squat to Tim and the board. They'll run it they way they see fit, period.
For some reason, I knew this kind of story would crop up as soon Steve was gone. "Oh goodie no more Steve, now we can change around apple!" No, no and NO. Apple got to where it is today because what they're doing is WORKING. Changing around the board, moving people in and out, etc is the DUMBEST thing they could do... apple is kicking butt just as they are, and they have been even without Jobs at the head. To change it now just because Steve is gone does not make any sense at all.
Too many people want to play armchair CEO and decide how apple "should" work... do you think apple got the largest market cap in tech by listing to all these people? NO.
The funny thing is I think Steve knew this kind of thing would happen, which is why he set up the Apple University. Some may say it's his ego. I think it's just smart? Jobs had a way of doing apple that revolutionized the business, and it's definitely a strategy I think apple should keep in the days ahead.
+100! Couldn't have said it better myself; and yes I am a shareholder with a substantial amount riding on this BOD doing the right thing: GET. THE. F***. OUTTA. THE. WAY!!!!
Interesting. Name a few giant megacorporations like Apple where the BOD has no power to replace the CEO.
The last company I worked for is a $15bn corporation, and while the BOD clearly have the power to replace the CEO, the question is why don't they. He has been a disaster for the company and they are massively underperforming the sector since he took over.
I think the reason for that is that he is also the Chairman of the Board, and in that role appointed a lot of the board, who are pretty much his buddies.
The Boards of Lehman Brothers had the responsibility to over see and the power to replace Richard Fuld, but they chose not to.......
The question isn't whether boards have the power, the question is what they do with it.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
A recipe for disaster.
Apple didn't get to where it is due to a meddling, over-involved BOD.
The Board needs to offer all it's support to Tim and his team, and then stand back and refrain from fucking things up.
They will try. But like all the groups wanting this or that from Apple, it will take a shareholder vote. And do you really think that they can find enough support for the PR nightmare of voting no confidence in Steve's board and Steve's chosen successor. Maybe if they bomb this iPhone release and the next iPad. But right now, likely not
The shareholders appointed the current BOD. I have little reason to expect any radical changes in the short run, either to the BOD or the officers.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
I know! OMG in heaven, the urge to do something to fuck up the company has started early and I'm very worried.
Comments
Boards of Directors are supposed to look after the broad interests of the shareholders, and I think they should also be looking out for the long term health of the company.
If and to the extent that the long-term health of the company is in opposition to the interests of the shareholders, then the long-term health of the company should be ignored.
For example, with some companies, it is best for the owners to liquidate and sell all the pieces to the highest bidders. In such cases, the long-term health of the company is not important.
Companies like Apple exist to generate shareholder value. If a Board member has deviant goals, that is a huge problem.
The owners of Apple, the Hedge Funds and Pension Plans, will decide how Apple WILL work. They will do it by appointing a BOD.
They will try. But like all the groups wanting this or that from Apple, it will take a shareholder vote. And do you really think that they can find enough support for the PR nightmare of voting no confidence in Steve's board and Steve's chosen successor. Maybe if they bomb this iPhone release and the next iPad. But right now, likely not
I have no doubt that Apple could continue to do very well creating wonderful devices for a very long time. BUT... I am afraid that won't happen due to the greed and stupidity of the Apple Board of Directors. I expect infighting, etc. I hope this isn't true, but I truly don't expect Apple to be as great as it once was. Jobs was able to keep these people in line, but will the CEO be able to do the same thing?
Jobs created an Apple culture which will guide the leaders of the company and it's products for a long time.
Instead of spewing your greed and stupidity crap here, you should grab a sign with a real dumb slogan and go join the Occupiers.
I will think differently about Apple's direction when Algore is gone from the board.
This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
A recipe for disaster.
Apple didn't get to where it is due to a meddling, over-involved BOD.
The Board needs to offer all it's support to Tim and his team, and then stand back and refrain from fucking things up.
Agreed
If and to the extent that the long-term health of the company is in opposition to the interests of the shareholders, then the long-term health of the company should be ignored.
Yes, you make a very good point, but I think there is a lot of grey area here. How you define the interests of the shareholders is the question.
The board and the shareholders are Apple's single worst enemy now.
Maybe it's time to use all that cash to take Apple private.
All this FUD. What are you trying to do? Depress the stock price so you can short it?
Really, nobody has any idea what the board has been like and what they will be like in the future. These and other analysts had absolutely no say in how Apple was run when Steve was there, and they have no say now. Making suggestions or offering advice means squat to Tim and the board. They'll run it they way they see fit, period.
For some reason, I knew this kind of story would crop up as soon Steve was gone. "Oh goodie no more Steve, now we can change around apple!" No, no and NO. Apple got to where it is today because what they're doing is WORKING. Changing around the board, moving people in and out, etc is the DUMBEST thing they could do... apple is kicking butt just as they are, and they have been even without Jobs at the head. To change it now just because Steve is gone does not make any sense at all.
Too many people want to play armchair CEO and decide how apple "should" work... do you think apple got the largest market cap in tech by listing to all these people? NO.
The funny thing is I think Steve knew this kind of thing would happen, which is why he set up the Apple University. Some may say it's his ego. I think it's just smart? Jobs had a way of doing apple that revolutionized the business, and it's definitely a strategy I think apple should keep in the days ahead.
+100! Couldn't have said it better myself; and yes I am a shareholder with a substantial amount riding on this BOD doing the right thing: GET. THE. F***. OUTTA. THE. WAY!!!!
That's only true if the board is given that power.
Interesting. Name a few giant megacorporations like Apple where the BOD has no legal power to replace the CEO.
Interesting. Name a few giant megacorporations like Apple where the BOD has no power to replace the CEO.
The last company I worked for is a $15bn corporation, and while the BOD clearly have the power to replace the CEO, the question is why don't they. He has been a disaster for the company and they are massively underperforming the sector since he took over.
I think the reason for that is that he is also the Chairman of the Board, and in that role appointed a lot of the board, who are pretty much his buddies.
The Boards of Lehman Brothers had the responsibility to over see and the power to replace Richard Fuld, but they chose not to.......
The question isn't whether boards have the power, the question is what they do with it.
The board and the shareholders are Apple's single worst enemy now.
Maybe it's time to use all that cash to take Apple private.
Ummm......."all that cash" belongs to the shareholders.
Who would the owners of the company be in your scenario?
This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
A recipe for disaster.
Apple didn't get to where it is due to a meddling, over-involved BOD.
The Board needs to offer all it's support to Tim and his team, and then stand back and refrain from fucking things up.
Agreed.
Sounds like a cheap click-bait piece by Reuters.
They will try. But like all the groups wanting this or that from Apple, it will take a shareholder vote. And do you really think that they can find enough support for the PR nightmare of voting no confidence in Steve's board and Steve's chosen successor. Maybe if they bomb this iPhone release and the next iPad. But right now, likely not
The shareholders appointed the current BOD. I have little reason to expect any radical changes in the short run, either to the BOD or the officers.
This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
Apple is now the most valuable company in the world - but somehow the board needs to mix things up, and start playing a greater role in the running of the company?
I know! OMG in heaven, the urge to do something to fuck up the company has started early and I'm very worried.
Yes, you make a very good point, but I think there is a lot of grey area here. How you define the interests of the shareholders is the question.
How I define that is unimportant.
How the shareholders define it is all that matters. They own the damn thing, not you or me.
How I define that is unimportant.
You're allowed an opinion though you know. Freedom of speech and all that.
I'm allowed an opinion too.
Yes, you make a very good point, but I think there is a lot of grey area here. How you define the interests of the shareholders is the question.
No grey area at all: maximize shareholder wealth.
Also, it's pretty much the law in the US, starting in 1919 (see http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/c...ord-motor-co/; subsequently codified in ALI Principles, see, e.g., http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handl...ction=journals.)
The question isn't whether boards have the power, the question is what they do with it.
Well, yeah, that is A question. But it is not the question which was raised by the statement I was responding to.