WSJ: Apple's Chamber departure not in shareholders' interests

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In an editorial published Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal called out Apple's resignation from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as an act of "green political correctness," rather than a smart business decision.



The editorial singled out both Apple and Nike, two companies that recently forfeited their stake in the Chamber over its stance on greenhouse gas emissions. It noted that former Vice President Al Gore, a member of the Apple Board of Directors, stands to profit from potential anticarbon legislation.



"Mr. Gore has also invested in renewable energy technologies that could make him even richer than he already is if new climate rules make renewables more competitive with carbon energy," the Journal asserted.



It also noted that Tim Cook, Apple's chief operating officer, also sits on the board of Nike. The editorial suggested that the timing of both companies' departure was not an "accident."



The Journal suggested that the tax impact for both companies would be relatively small. Under the proposed Boxer-Kerry bill in the Senate, Apple's carbon taxes would reportedly be between $43 million and $108 million a year. And Nike, the report said, has most of its factories overseas.



It concluded that companies should not "dump" the Chamber over one issue. If every company did that, it said, the Chamber wouldn't be able to serve anyone's interests, as it would be too worried about each individual company's specific agenda, rather than the health of business in general.



"Green virtue is easier when someone else is paying for it," the editorial said.



Apple has earned its share of fans and critics in the wake of its decision. Chamber President Thomas Donohue took on Mac maker after it said it would prefer the Chamber to have a "more progressive stance on this critical issue." Donohue said Apple forfeited the chance to "advance a 21st century approach to climate change."



But Apple earned accolades as well, from U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, who called the move "wonderful." Greenpeace, too, applauded Apple's decision to leave the group.



Recently, the Chamber threatened litigation if the EPA enacts greenhouse gas regulations. The Chamber would rather see Congress set policy through legislation. That caught the ire of Apple and Nike.



While Apple left the Chamber entirely, Nike only withdrew from its board. The shoe-maker has retained its membership. Preceding them in departure were three utility companies, Pacific Gas & Electric, PNM Resources and Exelon.



Last month, Apple began reporting its carbon emissions on its Web site. The company noted that its products produce a great deal more emissions than its operations.
«13456710

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 196
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,585member
    The WSJ is a very conservative journal. Its business articles are usually good, but its editorials are often not.



    This is one of those "not" times.



    It's interesting that the first companies to depart the chamber were power producing companies, companies that would be thought of as staying in line with the chamber's goals.



    Considering who the chamber consists of, i'm happy Apple departed.



    I expect more to do so.



    Apple belongs to the Business Roundtable, many members are not members of the chamber.
  • Reply 2 of 196
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    It also noted that Tim Cook, Apple's chief operating officer, also sits on the board of Nike. The editorial suggested that the timing of both companies' departure was not an "accident."



    No kidding? You think he should abstain/vote/have different opinion on something like this based on which board meeting he is sitting in?
  • Reply 3 of 196
    mystigomystigo Posts: 183member
    Rupert Murdoch's mouth piece takes a stand for corporatocracy. Wow. Who would have guessed it?
  • Reply 4 of 196
    They have been so wrong, so often lately, why bother with them?
  • Reply 5 of 196
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Gee... WSJ (sister publication to Fox news under Murdoch) says short term profits are more important than stemming global climate change.

    What a shock.
  • Reply 6 of 196
    As a shareholder and a former member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan, I'm glad Apple left.



    Does the chamber really add to Apple's bottom line?



    And when did Rupert Murdoch ever do anything beneficial for the environment, political or natural?
  • Reply 7 of 196
    Quote:

    an act of "green political correctness," rather than a smart business decision.



    In the wise words of the Wu-Tang Clan: C.R.E.A.M.



    Cash Rules Everything Around Me
  • Reply 8 of 196
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Just counting the days until Murdoch's empire crumbles to dust....
  • Reply 9 of 196
    The US Chamber of Commerce is a right wing front organization for the Republican party. So it comes as no surprise that the WSJ would side with them. Not even sure how they are allowed to use their name because they are rabidly anti-government.
  • Reply 10 of 196
    floccusfloccus Posts: 138member
    Al Gore stands to profit from investing in "green" technology if the climate bill passes... how is that a bad thing? Gore is no longer a Senator and thus wouldn't be voting for the bill himself, he simply recognized that doing something about climate change is going to require large investments in an area that few established business were providing goods/services. Frankly, the WSJ should be commending him for his foresight as a businessman for that and not using it as evidence that Apple will somehow be harmed when legislation passes.
  • Reply 11 of 196
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justflybob View Post


    Just counting the days until Murdoch's empire crumbles to dust....



    Right. Fox News is the most watched news channel in the US. The ratings for their primetime lineup dwarfs MSNBC and CNN and has for years. Murdoch is definately not in tune with the way America feels. He's out of touch. Most Americans support and crave a super left wing liberal agenda. That's why Obama's ratings are so high - cause people really love bigger government and higher taxes. I'm sure Murdoch's empire is falling soon. Hold your breath.
  • Reply 12 of 196
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The WSJ is a very conservative journal. Its business articles are usually good, but its editorials are often not.



    Indeed.



    So this is going to hurt Apple eh? How, exactly? Let's just gloss over that one.



    Moving on, we'll instead note that Nike also withdrew (sort of), and concoct a conspiracy about the board members. Uhhhh, OK.



    Note that the other companies involved, like Pacific Gas & Electric, PNM Resources and Exelon, have no obvious connections at all, which basically blows that theory.



    Then, after noting that the companies are withdrawing over their stance on climate change, we'll complain that the Board shouldn't be chasing individual demands. Huh?



    Maury
  • Reply 13 of 196
    It costs almost nothing for Apple and Nike to be "progressive" in their stance vs the Chamber. They both know that the majority of pollution and carbon dioxide they produce in other countries will never be subject to US controls or US carbon taxes.



    This board seems to be heavily populated with left wing geeks who don't really understand economics, psychology, marketing or Apple as business enterprise. And they don't like people to disagree with their positions because they wildly vilify those people/enterprises. The best thing for the folks that this description fits is to finish college.
  • Reply 14 of 196
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Paramount View Post


    The US Chamber of Commerce is a right wing front organization for the Republican party. So it comes as no surprise that the WSJ would side with them. Not even sure how they are allowed to use their name because they are rabidly anti-government.



    You realize you sound very uneducated when you say things like that. If your spew crap like that, pleae provide some sort of proof to back up your outrageous claim.



    I'm no CoC fan. I believe they are really only real agenda is to keep dues coming in to support their employees. Any chamber I've ever joined has proven to be able to help grow my business about 1% (give or take a percent).



    But please, spare us the left wing agenda which currently seems to be... blame everything on the RNC. It's weak. And desperate.
  • Reply 15 of 196
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Yosh1


    Who cares about WSJ anymore?



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    They have been so wrong, so often lately, why bother with them?









    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The WSJ is a very conservative journal. Its business articles are usually good, but its editorials are often not.



    This is one of those "not" times.



    It's interesting that the first companies to depart the chamber were power producing companies, companies that would be thought of as staying in line with the chamber's goals.



    Considering who the chamber consists of, i'm happy Apple departed.



    I expect more to do so.



    Apple belongs to the Business Roundtable, many members are not members of the chamber.



    Right - the Wall Street Journal doesn't know what they're talking about- especially that Walt Mossberg!
  • Reply 16 of 196
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,787member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The WSJ is a very conservative journal. Its business articles are usually good, but its editorials are often not.



    This is one of those "not" times.



    It's interesting that the first companies to depart the chamber were power producing companies, companies that would be thought of as staying in line with the chamber's goals.



    Considering who the chamber consists of, i'm happy Apple departed.



    I expect more to do so.



    Apple belongs to the Business Roundtable, many members are not members of the chamber.



    I agree with you totally.
  • Reply 17 of 196
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,787member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justflybob View Post


    Just counting the days until Murdoch's empire crumbles to dust....



    I agree, but sadly as long as there are Palin and Rush followers to lap it up it here to stay.
  • Reply 18 of 196
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justflybob View Post


    Just counting the days until Murdoch's empire crumbles to dust....



    I hope not... my favorite tv shows are on FOX.
  • Reply 19 of 196
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,787member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post


    Right. Fox News is the most watched news channel in the US. The ratings for their primetime lineup dwarfs MSNBC and CNN and has for years. Murdoch is definately not in tune with the way America feels. He's out of touch. Most Americans support and crave a super left wing liberal agenda. That's why Obama's ratings are so high - cause people really love bigger government and higher taxes. I'm sure Murdoch's empire is falling soon. Hold your breath.



    I didn't know it had a 'news' channel!
  • Reply 20 of 196
    Is "politically correct" still an active insult? It seems so 90s. Now it just sounds like a term the right uses for any politics of the left. WSJ: not just wrong, but wrong in an obsolete way.
Sign In or Register to comment.