Apple SVP Dan Riccio sells $11M in company stock, gives some proceeds to charity

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple's recently-minted Senior Vice President of Hardware Engineering Dan Riccio sold nearly $11 million worth of company stock this week in two separate sales, with a small portion of the gains going to a charitable donation.

Dan Riccio
Apple Senior Vice President of Hardware Engineering Dan Riccio. | Source: Apple


First spotted by CNET, Riccio sold off 19,726 shares in two sales on Thursday and Friday, as well as another 1,000 shares given away as a charitable donation. At the current AAPL stock valuation, the total value of the shares sold was over $10.73 million.

None of the shares sold this week were part of the stock options Riccio received after being promoted in August alongside Apple's new SVP of Mac Software and Engineering Craig Federighi. Both executives were each awarded 75,000 shares of restricted stock, which at the time was worth well over $50 million. The first batch of 25,000 shares will vest in December 2013, with the remaining units vesting equally in April 2015 and August 2016.

Riccio recently took over for the outgoing Bob Mansfield and is now responsible for engineering all Mac, iPhone, iPad and iPod lines. Mansfield quickly came out of retirement and returned to Apple, ultimately taking on the role of SVP of Technologies following former iOS chief Scott Forstall's ouster. Mansfield is said to have netted a a two-year agreement worth $2 million a month.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    Apple is so damn classy. This is a huge dip, a huge buying opportunity for AAPL, but this is when Apple execs decide to take some profit. Compare to Google, where several of their top executives took profit at it's recent outrageous peak, just before they were going to deliver their crappy earning's report, after which their stock dove 9%. It amazes me that Apple continues to suffer so badly with their PR. Their hands off approach is clearly not working.
  • Reply 2 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Apple is so damn classy. This is a huge dip, a huge buying opportunity for AAPL, but this is when Apple execs decide to take some profit. Compare to Google, where several of their top executives took profit at it's recent outrageous peak, just before they were going to deliver their crappy earning's report, after which their stock dove 9%. It amazes me that Apple continues to suffer so badly with their PR. Their hands off approach is clearly not working.

    Hmm... I'm not sure what's classy about selling when a stock is low. I am under the impression sales are happening now because 1) the capital gains tax is going up, and 2) stocks tend to dip before the end of the calendar year.
  • Reply 3 of 32
    Good for him.

    He might have been a little bit richer had he sold a couple months ago, but it's nice he's giving a bit to charity. Kudos.
  • Reply 4 of 32

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    Hmm... I'm not sure what's classy about selling when a stock is low. I am under the impression sales are happening now because 1) the capital gains tax is going up....


    I am not sure how that factors into the decision to sell if insiders truly believed that the stock is undervalued by 5% or more (which is the amount that the capital gains tax rate is expected to go up).


     


    Explain?

  • Reply 5 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    I am not sure how that factors into the decision to sell if insiders truly believed that the stock is undervalued by 5% or more (which is the amount that the capital gains tax rate is expected to go up).

    Explain?

    Whether something is considered under or overvalued is irrelevant it whether the seller thinks it's going to go down within a set amount for a set timeframe. If he thinks it will keep dropping before the end of the year and he wants to sell before the ned of the year then why wouldn't now be the best time to sell?
  • Reply 6 of 32
    solipsismx wrote: »
    Whether something is considered under or overvalued is irrelevant it whether the seller thinks it's going to go down within a set amount for a set timeframe. If he thinks it will keep dropping before the end of the year and he wants to sell before the ned of the year then why wouldn't now be the best time to sell?

    There are only two 'time frames', given your argument: between now and the end of the year (by when you think taxes might go up), or after that.

    Let's first focus on between now and the end of the year: if your hypothesis is true, then this should be signaling that insiders expect a further short term decline in Apple stock. If the market truly though that, it would be considered VERY bad news, and the stock would sink further. I doubt very much that this could possibly be true, given Apple's fundamentals. And I doubt that this is what you intend to mean: that AAPL has further to fall.

    Focusing next on the period after the end of the year, suppose capital gains rate went up, which would be by 5%. If a key insider such as Riccio thought that Apple is worth at least, say, 10% more than its price today, he would be better off selling when that price was realized (assuming that happens within some reasonable time frame) and paying 20% in taxes on his gains, rather than the 15% on gains at the current price. No?

    So I am failing to see your argument.
  • Reply 7 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    There are only two 'time frames', given your argument: between now and the end of the year (by when you think taxes might go up), or after that.
    Let's first focus on between now and the end of the year: if your hypothesis is true, then this should be signaling that insiders expect a further short term decline in Apple stock. If the market truly though that, it would be considered VERY bad news, and the stock would sink further. I doubt very much that this could possibly be true, given Apple's fundamentals. And I doubt that this is what you intend to mean: that AAPL has further to fall.
    Focusing next on the period after the end of the year, suppose capital gains rate went up, which would be by 5%. If a key insider such as Riccio thought that Apple is worth at least, say, 10% more than its price today, he would be better off selling when that price was realized (assuming that happens within some reasonable time frame) and paying 20% in taxes on his gains, rather than the 15% on gains at the current price. No?
    So I am failing to see your argument.

    1) Yes, it is possible for AAPL to continue to fall.

    2) Regardless or whether you or I think it will continue to fall is irrelevant to whether it will or will not, or more importantly, if Riccio thinks it will or will not.

    3) He may just want the money for something. Perhaps he has a short term investment he wants to get in on and sell before the end of the year so it also has lower taxes.

    4) You keep assuming that Apple's stock is at some unfathomable low that will shoot up. There is no guarantee of that and there is no guarantee that Riccio thinks what you think.

    5) My argument is simple, of all the reasons to want to sell now the most likely I've read is that he sold it for less than he knew he could have in the short run intentionally to make less money because he's being classy.
  • Reply 8 of 32
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post




     

    Hmm... I'm not sure what's classy about selling when a stock is low. I am under the impression sales are happening now because 1) the capital gains tax is going up, and 2) stocks tend to dip before the end of the calendar year.


    Where is our Santa Claus rally? 

  • Reply 9 of 32


    Obligatory "that means he's being fired, too" post.

  • Reply 10 of 32
    alexnalexn Posts: 119member
    Obligatory "that means he's being fired, too" post.

    You neglected to add "Apple is DOOMED!", "The sky is falling", etc., etc. ;).
  • Reply 11 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    One thing I've always been curious about is why Jony Ive doesn't have to disclose any of his stock grants or sales. I'm assuming his stock grants, salary etc. are similar to what the other SVP's receive so not sure why it's never disclosed.
  • Reply 12 of 32
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    rogifan wrote: »
    One thing I've always been curious about is why Jony Ive doesn't have to disclose any of his stock grants or sales. I'm assuming his stock grants, salary etc. are similar to what the other SVP's receive so not sure why it's never disclosed.

    I think it was because of his title at the company but he's apparently been an SVP since 1997 so I guess that isn't it.

    I was just looking over his Wikipedia page. I had never read it before. Good stuff.
  • Reply 13 of 32
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,219moderator
    Apple's recently-minted Senior Vice President of Hardware Engineering Dan Riccio sold nearly $11 million worth of company stock this week in two separate sales, with a small portion of the gains going to a charitable donation.

    At least he's keeping plenty to be able to afford a new toupee.

    He still looks like he carries knives though and he'll likely use them if you mention his toupee.

    It would be nice to see what these guys do in a given day besides arguing with Forstall. Are they putting in 90 hour weeks or just making the important decisions? We are always under the impression that these people are the most important people at Apple but the engineeres, designers, artists etc are really the important ones. Managers are nothing without talent beneath them. What was Mansfield doing on his own that was so important that is needs $2m/month? I'll have a go at it for $1m/month. If they aren't happy after a month, they can stick with Mansfield.
  • Reply 14 of 32

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    One thing I've always been curious about is why Jony Ive doesn't have to disclose any of his stock grants or sales. I'm assuming his stock grants, salary etc. are similar to what the other SVP's receive so not sure why it's never disclosed.


    Not US citizen, so doesn't have to disclose.

  • Reply 15 of 32


    Black turtleneck: check.

  • Reply 16 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I think it was because of his title at the company but he's apparently been an SVP since 1997 so I guess that isn't it.
    I was just looking over his Wikipedia page. I had never read it before. Good stuff.
    He first showed up on Apple's executive leadership page in April 2006. This was after Jon Rubinstein left. Apple announced that Tony Fadell was taking over the iPod division but never announced Ive's promotion. I'm assuming that's when he got the title bump, although I have heard he worked directly for Jobs even before Rubinstein left.
  • Reply 17 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    pfisher wrote: »
    Not US citizen, so doesn't have to disclose.
    OK, but John Browett's stock options were disclosed. As far as I know he's not a US citizen either.
  • Reply 18 of 32
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


    Black turtleneck: check.



    I'm waiting for the day that a turtleneck owned by Steve Jobs shows up on ebay or in a museum.

  • Reply 19 of 32

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pfisher View Post


    Not US citizen, so doesn't have to disclose.



    Not relevant whether someone's a US citizen or not. SEC requires all insider (director + officer) sales/purchases to be reported, as well as what their stock- and option-based compensation is.


     


    It looks like Jony Ive has neither sold nor bought any in the past 2 years: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=AAPL+Insider+Transactions

  • Reply 20 of 32
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Not relevant whether someone's a US citizen or not. SEC requires all insider (director + officer) sales/purchases to be reported, as well as what their stock- and option-based compensation is.

    It looks like Jony Ive has neither sold nor bought any in the past 2 years: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=AAPL+Insider+Transactions
    That seems unlikely, so perhaps he's not an director/officer? Not sure why though since he has SVP title. I'm assuming his comp and stock options are similar to his fellow SVP's.
Sign In or Register to comment.