This entire sham is at the hands of targeted hedge fund managers wanting to control greater and greater portions of large stocks to then insert influence over them and can do so thanks to congressional rules protecting them from liability.
Oh, please shut the **** up. Every single one of your posts in every thread in this forum is a variation of the above. How much of a failure Cook is. You're a broken, boring record. Find a new trolling meme.
Amazing how all these people who think Cook is a failure can never tell us who should be leading Apple instead or why the genius Steve Jobs chose Cook to succeed him in the first place.
When he took over at Apple in 2005, the stock was in the mid-$20s. Now it's selling at over $60. The stock swooned a bit during the recession (to ~$16), but since then, it has been on a fairly steady upwards trajectory.
People seem to view him as a very effective CEO. He has managed the Pixar integration very well, and many analysts seem to think that Disney has its mojo back -- something that it had seriously lost during the disastrous Eisner era.
Steve was in charge at Apple starting in early 1998. The iCEO was a moniker in name only. Removing the i in 2005 meant no difference to who was running and when I worked for him I always knew he was the CEO, period.
Steve was in charge at Apple starting in early 1998. The iCEO was a moniker in name only. Removing the i in 2005 meant no difference to who was running and when I worked for him I always knew he was the CEO, period.
2005? I though Steve removed the iCEO name long before then.
Steve was in charge at Apple starting in early 1998. The iCEO was a moniker in name only. Removing the i in 2005 meant no difference to who was running and when I worked for him I always knew he was the CEO, period.
The responded-to post is about Iger, so I am not sure what the iCEO thing has to do with anything.
This entire sham is at the hands of targeted hedge fund managers wanting to control greater and greater portions of large stocks to then insert influence over them and can do so thanks to congressional rules protecting them from liability.
Not only that, they are polluting your Precious Bodily Fluids while they are at it. I hope you don't have sharp objects where you are.
Oh, please shut the **** up. Every single one of your posts in every thread in this forum is a variation of the above. How much of a failure Cook is. You're a broken, boring record. Find a new trolling meme, or better yet, find a new hobby. Cook has never flipped the bird at shareholders. Steve Jobs did, and did that harm the company? No. Today could not have provided more clear evidence that the stock drops consist of insane investor/analyst reactions making sensational assumptions to completely bullshit stories as this Cirrus one. Yet, you still pretend that it's directly because of how much Tim Cook is hated. Stop projecting your hatred unto everyone else.
Tim Cook is not hated, he is just not respected -- unfortunate, because I am quite sure he is a stand-up guy and great at supply chain management, but not a good fit for his current gig.
What evidence do we have that Tim is motivated by money? It's not like he's out there spending millions on yachts and islands ala Larry Ellison. We don't know much about Cook but the little we do know indicates someone whose life revolves around Apple and not much else. I've heard he's in the office at 5 am and is usually one of the last to leave. I don't think dedication to Apple is a problem.
He cares enough to have gotten almost half a billion in compensation last year (yes, much of it deferred, but he dumped $80MM worth on the market almost exactly a year ago).
Oh, please shut the **** up. Every single one of your posts in every thread in this forum is a variation of the above. How much of a failure Cook is. You're a broken, boring record. Find a new trolling meme, or better yet, find a new hobby. Cook has never flipped the bird at shareholders. Steve Jobs did, and did that harm the company? No. Today could not have provided more clear evidence that the stock drops consist of insane investor/analyst reactions making sensational assumptions to completely bullshit stories as this Cirrus one. Yet, you still pretend that it's directly because of how much Tim Cook is hated. Stop projecting your hatred unto everyone else.
Analysts typically don't own the stock they cover. Investors own the stock. Some of Apple's biggest and longest holders are selling, that is indisputable. Telling investors (oh by the way a guy worth more and if you measure success by money, more successful that Cook) their idea for creating shareholder value is a 'silly sideshow' is what I mean by flipping the bird. It wasn't literal if you took it that way. He's the CEO. He's the face of the company. He told people "not to bet against Apple." He talked about how much additional growth there was left for smartphones. He guided earnings way below the previous estimates for this quarter as he did not communicate clearly enough as to the trajectory of the business prior to that.
Honestly, there are really easy fixes to what the stock is doing. Announce a multi-year buyback. Start it immediately by issuing $20 billion of debt (less than half a turn of leverage) at a price that will be at worst a net neutral from a cash perspective (i.e. interest offset by dividends not paid on stock bought). Take the dividend up slightly. If its the case, come out, be honest and say 'the next qtr or two will be tough and below what we had hoped, but we believe the pipeline and market opportunity, combined with buybacks will allow us to grow earnings on a y/y basis again after that.' Market will give him some slack and not think he has his head in the sand and he would put a floor in the stock. Really, really simple stuff and not anything that any CEO in his shoes wouldn't want to be able to say, so if he doesn't, the presumption is he can't and stock will get hammered. Communicate with the people that own your company. Its not a novel idea.
Quant finance is obviously not your thing. Yes, my statement is a probabilistic statement, but volatility is a very good predictor of volatility, much more so than a predictor of direction.
Comments
The adopted term is concern troll. His comments certainly fit the build.
True, but I also like Slurpy's stronger characterization above.
When he took over at Apple in 2005, the stock was in the mid-$20s. Now it's selling at over $60. The stock swooned a bit during the recession (to ~$16), but since then, it has been on a fairly steady upwards trajectory.
People seem to view him as a very effective CEO. He has managed the Pixar integration very well, and many analysts seem to think that Disney has its mojo back -- something that it had seriously lost during the disastrous Eisner era.
Steve was in charge at Apple starting in early 1998. The iCEO was a moniker in name only. Removing the i in 2005 meant no difference to who was running and when I worked for him I always knew he was the CEO, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Here's another gem. Does anyone believe this guy that he has his fortune tied to Apple's stock value? That he just loves his Apple products?
He is drooling over his vision of Apple's destruction. Fake fake fake.
He is wasting his time on this forum, so he must care. Your gratuitous abuse is not really a sign of purity of heart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Steve was in charge at Apple starting in early 1998. The iCEO was a moniker in name only. Removing the i in 2005 meant no difference to who was running and when I worked for him I always knew he was the CEO, period.The responded-to post is about Iger, so I am not sure what the iCEO thing has to do with anything.
Originally Posted by igriv
He is wasting his time on this forum, so he must care.
Well, care enough to keep being paid, at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
This entire sham is at the hands of targeted hedge fund managers wanting to control greater and greater portions of large stocks to then insert influence over them and can do so thanks to congressional rules protecting them from liability.
Not only that, they are polluting your Precious Bodily Fluids while they are at it. I hope you don't have sharp objects where you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Oh, please shut the **** up. Every single one of your posts in every thread in this forum is a variation of the above. How much of a failure Cook is. You're a broken, boring record. Find a new trolling meme, or better yet, find a new hobby. Cook has never flipped the bird at shareholders. Steve Jobs did, and did that harm the company? No. Today could not have provided more clear evidence that the stock drops consist of insane investor/analyst reactions making sensational assumptions to completely bullshit stories as this Cirrus one. Yet, you still pretend that it's directly because of how much Tim Cook is hated. Stop projecting your hatred unto everyone else.
Tim Cook is not hated, he is just not respected -- unfortunate, because I am quite sure he is a stand-up guy and great at supply chain management, but not a good fit for his current gig.
He certainly captures in words what most of us are thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Well, care enough to keep being paid, at least.
By whom? What kind of paranoiac are you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
Just curious: do you guys think it will rebound tomorrow or continue to slide?
There will be a big move, direction impossible to predict.
It takes a paranoiac to know one, I am guessing.
...or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
What evidence do we have that Tim is motivated by money? It's not like he's out there spending millions on yachts and islands ala Larry Ellison. We don't know much about Cook but the little we do know indicates someone whose life revolves around Apple and not much else. I've heard he's in the office at 5 am and is usually one of the last to leave. I don't think dedication to Apple is a problem.
He cares enough to have gotten almost half a billion in compensation last year (yes, much of it deferred, but he dumped $80MM worth on the market almost exactly a year ago).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Oh, please shut the **** up. Every single one of your posts in every thread in this forum is a variation of the above. How much of a failure Cook is. You're a broken, boring record. Find a new trolling meme, or better yet, find a new hobby. Cook has never flipped the bird at shareholders. Steve Jobs did, and did that harm the company? No. Today could not have provided more clear evidence that the stock drops consist of insane investor/analyst reactions making sensational assumptions to completely bullshit stories as this Cirrus one. Yet, you still pretend that it's directly because of how much Tim Cook is hated. Stop projecting your hatred unto everyone else.
Analysts typically don't own the stock they cover. Investors own the stock. Some of Apple's biggest and longest holders are selling, that is indisputable. Telling investors (oh by the way a guy worth more and if you measure success by money, more successful that Cook) their idea for creating shareholder value is a 'silly sideshow' is what I mean by flipping the bird. It wasn't literal if you took it that way. He's the CEO. He's the face of the company. He told people "not to bet against Apple." He talked about how much additional growth there was left for smartphones. He guided earnings way below the previous estimates for this quarter as he did not communicate clearly enough as to the trajectory of the business prior to that.
Honestly, there are really easy fixes to what the stock is doing. Announce a multi-year buyback. Start it immediately by issuing $20 billion of debt (less than half a turn of leverage) at a price that will be at worst a net neutral from a cash perspective (i.e. interest offset by dividends not paid on stock bought). Take the dividend up slightly. If its the case, come out, be honest and say 'the next qtr or two will be tough and below what we had hoped, but we believe the pipeline and market opportunity, combined with buybacks will allow us to grow earnings on a y/y basis again after that.' Market will give him some slack and not think he has his head in the sand and he would put a floor in the stock. Really, really simple stuff and not anything that any CEO in his shoes wouldn't want to be able to say, so if he doesn't, the presumption is he can't and stock will get hammered. Communicate with the people that own your company. Its not a novel idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
...or not.
Quant finance is obviously not your thing. Yes, my statement is a probabilistic statement, but volatility is a very good predictor of volatility, much more so than a predictor of direction.