Briefly: Apple CFO Oppenheimer nets $16.4M in stock selloff

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission published Friday reveals Apple senior vice president and Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer sold 37,172 shares of AAPL stock earlier this week at a price of $440.31, netting the executive $16.37 million.

Oppenheimer
Source: SEC


The sale was executed one day following Apple's quarterly earnings call for its third fiscal quarter of 2013 on Tuesday, and was reported pursuant to SEC Rule 10b5-1 regarding insider trading.

According to previous SEC filings, the shares Oppenheimer sold came from a cache of 75,000 restricted stock units that vested in June. At the time, the executive sold off 37,828 shares worth $15,641,878, with Wednesday's transaction depleting the remaining vested stock.

Oppenheimer now holds a total of 4,834 common stock shares, which at today's price of $440.99 are worth $2.13 million, and will see another 75,000 RSUs vest in March 2016 contingent on his continued employment at Apple.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    Someone's going shopping
  • Reply 2 of 26
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Everett Ruess View Post



    Someone's going shopping




    Part of it is probably due to taxes on recently vested shares.

  • Reply 3 of 26
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Everett Ruess View Post



    Someone's going shopping


    No, what he's going to do after paying taxes is put all of the money in $10 bills and just throw them around for anyone.    /s

  • Reply 4 of 26
    rainrain Posts: 538member
    Apple executive team dumping shares as fast as they can without being too obvious...
    Sell.


  • Reply 5 of 26
    Give some to me plz
  • Reply 6 of 26
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member


    He thought he better sell them before they were taken off him when the boss became aware of the news that Samsung now makes more profit selling phones than Apple does.


     


    What was that about gross profit being more important than market share?  Now Samsung appear to have have more of both.


     


    Quote:


    Samsung has become the most profitable mobile phone company in the world, overtaking Apple, a report says.


    Samsung's handset division had an estimated operating profit of $5.2bn (£3.4bn) in the second quarter of 2013, according to Strategy Analytics.


    Apple's iPhone operating profit was estimated at $4.6bn, with the iPhone range "underperforming".




     


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23463111


     


    Another article I read claims smartphones are now commodities and the boom in growth for smartphones is over, and that lower priced models are where the growth is at, a market sector which Samsung will better be able to profit from than Apple:


     


     


    Quote:


    The smartphone has crossed the line from shiny new technology to ubiquitous commodity.


    App-laden, Web-surfing phones have surged in popularity over the past half-decade and generated $293.9 billion in sales last year alone. They are now used by more than 1 billion people around the world. With more than half of mobile users in the U.S. and developed countries owning a smartphone, and consumers in emerging markets including China and India gravitating toward cheaper models, demand is slowing for high-end devices.



     


    The average price of a smartphone has plunged to $375 from $450 since the beginning of 2012, IDC estimates.



     


    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-21/high-end-smartphone-boom-ending-as-price-drop-hits-apple.html

     

  • Reply 7 of 26
  • Reply 8 of 26
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I've seen this Strategy Analytics release reported all over the place. Can someone explain where they got that $4.6B figure? I don't see any where in Apple's 10Q where they reported profit by segment. As for Samsung, they do break out profit by segment but I would assume their mobile segment is more than just phones and would include tablets as well.
  • Reply 9 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,087member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rain View Post



    Apple executive team dumping shares as fast as they can without being too obvious...

    Sell.



     


     


    Drop dead... please.

  • Reply 10 of 26
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member


    Oh noes - Apple is DOOOMEDTM

  • Reply 11 of 26
    thecorethecore Posts: 56member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rain View Post



    Apple executive team dumping shares as fast as they can without being too obvious...

    Sell.



     


     


    Unlike the misleading nature of your post,  which is quite obvious`

  • Reply 12 of 26
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Apple execs have been selling stock at certain junctures for years now, regardless of Apple's performance.

    One would assume that at some point they'd like to cash in on their financial opportunities.
  • Reply 13 of 26
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    quadra 610 wrote: »
    Apple execs have been selling stock at certain junctures for years now, regardless of Apple's performance.

    One would assume that at some point they'd like to cash in on their financial opportunities.

    That's true, but it is odd that so many of them don't keep significant amounts. Oppenheimer's holdings are infinitesimal given his salary and position. The same is true of Cook. It is really odd that neither of them has any significant holdings and have been selling their stock shortly after it vests.
  • Reply 14 of 26
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,221member
    jragosta wrote: »
    That's true, but it is odd that so many of them don't keep significant amounts. Oppenheimer's holdings are infinitesimal given his salary and position. The same is true of Cook. It is really odd that neither of them has any significant holdings and have been selling their stock shortly after it vests.

    Imo they dont want to have all there eggs in the same basket. Those shares must be a significant amount of cash and they will get more later on. He did wait after the earnings to sell them.
  • Reply 15 of 26
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,219moderator
    Someone's going shopping

    It would be interesting to see if they invested the money in stocks elsewhere. Some of them buy expensive property. Jony Ive spent $17m on a property.

    They'll keep some in banks for living expenses but the bulk of it will be reinvested into something else.

    Selling it doesn't show a lack of faith in the company though, just that there are better investment opportunities elsewhere. A company can do perfectly well financially but not give a good return for investors. Microsoft makes loads of money for example but not a good investment:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/07/26/einhorn-turns-on-microsoft-investment/
  • Reply 16 of 26
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    herbapou wrote: »
    Imo they dont want to have all there eggs in the same basket. Those shares must be a significant amount of cash and they will get more later on. He did wait after the earnings to sell them.

    I understand not wanting all your eggs in one basket. But an executive for a public company like this is normally expected to have a significant holding in that company's stock.
  • Reply 17 of 26
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post





    Selling it doesn't show a lack of faith in the company though, just that there are better investment opportunities elsewhere.


     


    It is not possible to say whether or not the execs selling their shares shows a lack of faith.  You certainly can't say it shows faith, and you can't rule out that it shows a lack of faith, as their behaviour is exactly what one would expect if there was.


     


    If I was an Apple investor, which I was seriously contemplating at one point, I would be concerned about your second point, that there are better investment opportunities elsewhere.  If there were big things in the pipeline like the next iPad or Apple panel TV that has been posited, then I doubt they would be quit so keen to divest themselves of shares, as the introduction of revolutionary new products would almost certainly see the stock take off again.

  • Reply 18 of 26
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member


    Why would Apple be buying back shares like crazy if they didn't believe AAPL would go higher?

  • Reply 19 of 26


     


    It is normal for executives to sell the stock after it is vested. It is misleading to say that samsung had more profits than Apple. Samsung's Net Profit for June Quarter was 6.6 Billion dollars & Apple posted quarterly net profit of $6.9 billion. Previous Quarter Samsung had released one of their latest smartphones while Apple iPhones were 9 months old.  Both Apple and Samsung do not give any net profit details regarding smartphones exclusively, so it is misleading to speak net profit in a specific category.


    Samsung makes 1000 different products other than smartphones & feature phones. It is ridiculous to say most of their profits is from a slow moving high end smartphone.


     


    Apple is presently not competing with samsung in mid range and low range smartphones. Samsung's net profit for all products that also includes smartphones and tablets for the last 12 months is only 19.77 billion according to yahoo finance. As per reports Samsung profits for smartphone is around 50% of all profits.


    Apple Manufactures mainly 2 or 3 products which includes smartphones & tablets. Apple's net profit for all products which also includes smartphones & tablets for the last 12 months is 39.67 Billion according to Yahoo Finance. Apple's profits in smartphone & tablets is 70% of all profits. In final analysis if you just compare net mobile profits for the last 12 months for both samsung & apple, you will notice that APPLE has 66% of net profits in the smartphone segment.


     


    Strategic Analytics, IDC, Gartner should find the market share in different price ranges.  The average price for samsung was around $250 and Apple's average price is around $581.  We all know that you sell more smartphones in the lower price range which samsung and other android smartphone sellers specialize.  Apple sells at $500 +range only.  You can sell few BMW's compared to a toyota corolla, nissan maxima or Honda Civic.  Does that mean BMW is losing marketing share.  You cannot compare Apple's and Oranges.  All these expert research firm should find marketshare in different price segment. 


    Samsung has long put out a new phone every two weeks. They like to just throw it out there and see what sells. This is not innovation but carpet bombing. It says Samsung has no clue  evidenced by the trial which showed the manufacturing arm giving specifications to the design arm on how to design a phone by dissecting the Apple one they built.


    As for tablets, every survey I have seen shows Apple owns 90% of the tablet market by web browsing metrics. So while Samsung may be shipping tablets I wonder who is buying it or what they use it for.


    This should all be taken in context of recent reports that Samsung can’t move their phones.


    And by the way Samsung devices have always been cheap. They are not known for longevity.


     


    If you ever wonder why the iPhone has consistently had higher quality and customer satisfaction ratings than any other phone, and why iPhone owners are much more likely to buy another iPhone in the future than users of other phones would repeat their purchase choices, it’s because Apple’s product development and production has a very different focus than those of competitors.

  • Reply 20 of 26
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


    Why would Apple be buying back shares like crazy if they didn't believe AAPL would go higher?





    Because they literally have so much money they don't know what else to spend it on.  This way it looks like they are doing something with their money and might appease sharks like that hedge fund head who took a bite out of them just a few months ago.


     


    Companies don't buy back their own shares on the expectation they will go higher so they can profit from their latter sale, they are taking them out of play to boost the value of those still available.

Sign In or Register to comment.