I don’t think that’s fair - $5 mil is a large donation, and I like the way he did it without publicity
That's rich. The only reason you even know about it is because of publicity.
Arguably due to SEC requirements. There’s no evidence Cook intended to broadcast his donation.
Metriacanthosaurus has a point, based on the original post's wording. It's because of the media that we are discussing it, which means it's publicized. If the OP had stated "without self publicizing" it would read different; I think that's the way he intended it because he also included "the way he did it" with "he" referring to Cook.
Of course, someone more cynical will say that because they know the SEC requires the declaration that they use that to self promote their charity while pretending to be humble blah blah blah.
StrangeDays said: ... For a person with a net worth of $500,000, you would have to donate $5,000 for a 1% donation. When have you *ever* done that?
Good point, but I think donating to true charity is good no matter what percentage of your income it is. But, what if your net worth is -$100,000? Should people be giving you money, and you giving none to charity?
I think my issue (given Tim's past donations we do know about) is that it is somewhat questionable in terms of 'charity.' I don't like how fuzzy that term has become these days. It could be a political campaign hiding under 501c4. It could be some cause most wouldn't consider a charity. It could be some fund-raising for something that isn't bad, but isn't really helping the needy, either. Or, maybe it is going to some truly great cause. But, that shouldn't be the assumption as it has become around that term.
From https://appleinsider.com/articles/15/03/27/apples-tim-cook-plans-to-give-away-all-of-his-money "Cook will contribute substantially all of those funds to charity, after setting aside a small amount to fund his nephew's education." Maybe the $5 mil is for his nephew, a yearly set aside for his birthday. As "Interestingly, todays' reported gift was executed almost a year to the dayafter a similar transfer worth nearly $5 million was conducted last August."
I don’t think that’s fair - $5 mil is a large donation, and I like the way he did it without publicity
That's rich. The only reason you even know about it is because of publicity.
Arguably due to SEC requirements. There’s no evidence Cook intended to broadcast his donation.
Metriacanthosaurus has a point, based on the original post's wording. It's because of the media that we are discussing it, which means it's publicized. If the OP had stated "without self publicizing" it would read different; I think that's the way he intended it because he also included "the way he did it" with "he" referring to Cook.
Of course, someone more cynical will say that because they know the SEC requires the declaration that they use that to self promote their charity while pretending to be humble blah blah blah.
And publicized on the same day he receives $115M in stock, so perhaps by intent. Still can't argue against any donations to charitable efforts. I have a very well to do extended family member (he could never spend all he had in his lifetime) who would NEVER donate any of his own money for any reason. The classic miser.
Comments
Of course, someone more cynical will say that because they know the SEC requires the declaration that they use that to self promote their charity while pretending to be humble blah blah blah.
I think my issue (given Tim's past donations we do know about) is that it is somewhat questionable in terms of 'charity.' I don't like how fuzzy that term has become these days. It could be a political campaign hiding under 501c4. It could be some cause most wouldn't consider a charity. It could be some fund-raising for something that isn't bad, but isn't really helping the needy, either. Or, maybe it is going to some truly great cause. But, that shouldn't be the assumption as it has become around that term.
"Cook will contribute substantially all of those funds to charity, after setting aside a small amount to fund his nephew's education."
Maybe the $5 mil is for his nephew, a yearly set aside for his birthday. As "Interestingly, todays' reported gift was executed almost a year to the day after a similar transfer worth nearly $5 million was conducted last August."