On Mr. Levinson, the right thing is for him to resign from the Apple position, and if not, the board should replace him right away. (1) He will have no mindshare but to his new CEO position. (2) No one has been able to serve 2 masters at the same time, specially if they are competitors. (3) Like it or not, he will find himself in conflicting situations and most probably will side with Google.
It's common for directors to be CEO's of other companies. Take a look at the other Apple directors. A few years back Levinson even served on both Apple and Google's boards at the same time.
It's common for directors to be CEO's of other companies. Take a look at the other Apple directors. A few years back Levinson even served on both Apple and Google's boards at the same time.
Perhaps that was long enough ago to be when Apple and Google were good partners, you know before Google turned evil. If you reply it was after that I'll have to rethink ...
Perhaps that was long enough ago to be when Apple and Google were good partners, you know before Google turned evil. If you reply it was after that I'll have to rethink ...
Levinson resigned from Google's board in October/2009, shortly after Schmidt resigned from Apple's board.
Kind of makes my point then. Truthfully, I miss the good old days I was totally into everything Google back then.
Agreed., but It was only fair that Levinson got to stick around at Google a bit longer to even the score, stealing a little more inside knowledge of Google's plans to take back to Apple.
Agreed. It was only fair that Levinson got to stick around at Google a bit longer to even the score, stealing just a little more inside knowledge of Google's plans to take back to Apple.
I have a huge problem with this. Given the rocky history with Schmidt on the board, and all the legal tussles now between the two companies, it is weird that someone could be an officer at both companies. After all, he has access to any information he wants about Apple, and a lot about Google (at least in their plans for health).
Health care is potentially a massive area of growth for Apple. Witness, for instance, the increasingly ubiquitous use of the iPad by doctors and hospitals, and the dozens and dozens of health apps. It is a multi-trillion dollar industry with a ton of IT-related money to be made. I have to assume that Google will be competing intensely in this area as well.
Time for Levinson to choose, and Apple's board to make him do so. 'But he's a nice guy' doesn't cut it for me, as a shareholder.
I have a huge problem with this. Given the rocky history with Schmidt on the board, and all the legal tussles now between the two companies, it is weird that someone could be an officer at both companies. After all, he has access to any information he wants about Apple, and a lot about Google (at least in their plans for health).
Health care is potentially a massive area of growth for Apple. Witness, for instance, the increasingly ubiquitous use of the iPad by doctors and hospitals, and the dozens and dozens of health apps. It is a multi-trillion dollar industry with a ton of IT-related money to be made. I have to assume that Google will be competing intensely in this area as well.
Time for Levinson to choose, and Apple's board to make him do so. 'But he's a nice guy' doesn't cut it for me, as a shareholder.
Agreed. Hopefully there will be a forceful move to do something about this. I am not happy he'd even be on the Google board even if he left Apple. I know it's common for sitting on several boards ... but when there is so much litigation and recent history of IP theft as there is here then there should be new conditions set on such positions. (Yes I know the litigation is mostly a proxy for Android via Scamsung not directly but it all comes down to Google in the end)
I'm sure Apple has some people thinking about health care solutions. I'm not cool with having another potential Schmidt. No reason for Apple to put themselves in that position. Let Art go and instead have Apple also invest in Calico. Additionally if Art is serious about this he should focus on his new CEO job.
I'm sure Apple has some people thinking about health care solutions. I'm not cool with having another potential Schmidt. No reason for Apple to put themselves in that position. Let Art go and instead have Apple also invest in Calico. Additionally if Art is serious about this he should focus on his new CEO job.
Snag is, they let him go and he already probably knows enough, if not details but general directions, to keep Google happy for years to come. I'm thinking euthanasia ...
I am a stockholder, also, and I don't agree that there is a conflict of interest. Just because Apple board chairman Levinson is an investor and CEO of a company co-founded with an Apple (arch)rival, I can't imagine how Calico will conflict with Apple, a device/software technology company.
While I agree being CEO of a company INVESTED in by Google is much different than being CEO OF GOOGLE and sitting on Apple's Board, (the former has no reason to bring up Apple business in the context of Calico… the latter, there was no way to separate the roles in your brain… and your primary job is to maximize GOOG value) the conflict (to me) is less about confidential business plans...
...and more about being a full time CEO of a serious startup (everything about Levinson tells me he doesn't do things 1/2 way, as I quite admired Genentech), and being CoB of the MOST HIGHLY VALUED COMPANY IN THE FREE WORLD. There are only 24 hours in the day.
One could infer from this that Levinson sees that the current board and Apple Executives are on the right flight path, and he can take 7.5 hours off a day to incubate a highly visible startup (It will be high on the search return lists;-). But I would think that as a stockholder (I am not at current, I bought my retirement home this summer;-), That's what I would question during the next board elections.
You know he was with Google back in 1980, a long time before he joined Apple.
I'm allowing for the date typo here as I am nice. But .... There you go again! That was the 'other Google' you know before the red Kryptonite. You have to remember this in your posts or you will lose credibility.
Comments
It's common for directors to be CEO's of other companies. Take a look at the other Apple directors. A few years back Levinson even served on both Apple and Google's boards at the same time.
Perhaps that was long enough ago to be when Apple and Google were good partners, you know before Google turned evil. If you reply it was after that I'll have to rethink ...
Levinson resigned from Google's board in October/2009, shortly after Schmidt resigned from Apple's board.
Kind of makes my point then. Truthfully, I miss the good old days I was totally into everything Google back then.
Agreed., but It was only fair that Levinson got to stick around at Google a bit longer to even the score, stealing a little more inside knowledge of Google's plans to take back to Apple.
LOL, can't help liking you.
Health care is potentially a massive area of growth for Apple. Witness, for instance, the increasingly ubiquitous use of the iPad by doctors and hospitals, and the dozens and dozens of health apps. It is a multi-trillion dollar industry with a ton of IT-related money to be made. I have to assume that Google will be competing intensely in this area as well.
Time for Levinson to choose, and Apple's board to make him do so. 'But he's a nice guy' doesn't cut it for me, as a shareholder.
Are you jealous he holds 2 important positions?
If you're talking to me: no. He can hold a dozen, for all I care.
Of course, it's more likely you completely missed my point.
Agreed. Hopefully there will be a forceful move to do something about this. I am not happy he'd even be on the Google board even if he left Apple. I know it's common for sitting on several boards ... but when there is so much litigation and recent history of IP theft as there is here then there should be new conditions set on such positions. (Yes I know the litigation is mostly a proxy for Android via Scamsung not directly but it all comes down to Google in the end)
Snag is, they let him go and he already probably knows enough, if not details but general directions, to keep Google happy for years to come. I'm thinking euthanasia ...
I am a stockholder, also, and I don't agree that there is a conflict of interest. Just because Apple board chairman Levinson is an investor and CEO of a company co-founded with an Apple (arch)rival, I can't imagine how Calico will conflict with Apple, a device/software technology company.
While I agree being CEO of a company INVESTED in by Google is much different than being CEO OF GOOGLE and sitting on Apple's Board, (the former has no reason to bring up Apple business in the context of Calico… the latter, there was no way to separate the roles in your brain… and your primary job is to maximize GOOG value) the conflict (to me) is less about confidential business plans...
...and more about being a full time CEO of a serious startup (everything about Levinson tells me he doesn't do things 1/2 way, as I quite admired Genentech), and being CoB of the MOST HIGHLY VALUED COMPANY IN THE FREE WORLD. There are only 24 hours in the day.
Get the traitor off the board. Now. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
No two ways about it, Larry Page wants to buy immortality.
(And, yes, as an AAPL shareholder, I think Levinson should resign from Apple's BoD -- alongside Bill Campbell.)
I believe he was with Google before joining Apple's board.
EDIT: Nope. He was added to Apple's board in 2000 and didn't join Google's until 2004
You know he was with Google back in 1980, a long time before he joined Apple.
Yo, Google wasn't even around in 1980. It started in 1998. They need to train you better.
Guess Google Time is in alpha, otherwise we would have heard of it along with all their other beta products.
I'm allowing for the date typo here as I am nice. But .... There you go again! That was the 'other Google' you know before the red Kryptonite. You have to remember this in your posts or you will lose credibility.