Apple's Steve Jobs named world's best-performing CEO
For increasing his company's market cap a whopping $150 billion in the last 12 years, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs was named the best-performing CEO in the world.
The rankings, revealed in the January-February 2010 edition of Harvard Business Review, place Steve Jobs comfortablyin front, well ahead of second-place finisher Yun Jong-Yong of Samsung Electronics.
"The #1 CEO on the list, Steve Jobs, delivered a whopping 3,188% industry-adjusted return (34% compounded annually) after he rejoined Apple as CEO in 1997, when the company was in dire shape," the report said. "From that time until the end of September 2009, Apples market value increased by $150 billion."
The global ranking compared 1,999 CEOs that assumed their job no earlier than January 1995 and no later than December 2007. The executives had to be the head of a publicly traded company that was present on the Standard & Poor's Global 1200 or its BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) 40 list at some point since 1997.
The criteria did exclude high-profile CEOs like Microsoft founder Bill Gates, who took the helm of his company well before 1995. Though he was ousted from Apple in 1985, Jobs returned to the company he co-founded in 1996, when his company NeXT Computer was acquired by Apple. When asked about Jobs in November, Gates credited him with saving Apple upon his return.
The magazine also compared its list with Forbes magazine's tally of the highest-paid CEOs, where Jobs ranked third, and Barron's 2009 list of the 30 most respected chief executives, where Jobs also appeared. While Jobs famously accepts a $1 yearly salary, he earns a great deal through stock-based compensation.
Six of the top 10 CEOs came from technology-related companies. Following Jobs were Yun Jong-Yong of Samsung (2), John Chambers of Cisco Systems (4), Jeff Bezos of Amazon (7), Margaret Whitman of Ebay (8) and Eric Schmidt of Google (9). Schmidt was a member of Apple's board of directors until this summer, when a Federal Trade Commission investigation forced him to resign. During his tenure, Schmidt accepted thousands of dollars in Apple gear, but took no pay.
In November, Jobs was given the title "CEO of the Decade" by Fortune. The magazine lauded him for making Apple a groundbreaking technology leader and the most valuable company in Silicon Valley. Jobs was also a finalist for Time magazine's 2009 "Person of the Year."
The rankings, revealed in the January-February 2010 edition of Harvard Business Review, place Steve Jobs comfortablyin front, well ahead of second-place finisher Yun Jong-Yong of Samsung Electronics.
"The #1 CEO on the list, Steve Jobs, delivered a whopping 3,188% industry-adjusted return (34% compounded annually) after he rejoined Apple as CEO in 1997, when the company was in dire shape," the report said. "From that time until the end of September 2009, Apples market value increased by $150 billion."
The global ranking compared 1,999 CEOs that assumed their job no earlier than January 1995 and no later than December 2007. The executives had to be the head of a publicly traded company that was present on the Standard & Poor's Global 1200 or its BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) 40 list at some point since 1997.
The criteria did exclude high-profile CEOs like Microsoft founder Bill Gates, who took the helm of his company well before 1995. Though he was ousted from Apple in 1985, Jobs returned to the company he co-founded in 1996, when his company NeXT Computer was acquired by Apple. When asked about Jobs in November, Gates credited him with saving Apple upon his return.
The magazine also compared its list with Forbes magazine's tally of the highest-paid CEOs, where Jobs ranked third, and Barron's 2009 list of the 30 most respected chief executives, where Jobs also appeared. While Jobs famously accepts a $1 yearly salary, he earns a great deal through stock-based compensation.
Six of the top 10 CEOs came from technology-related companies. Following Jobs were Yun Jong-Yong of Samsung (2), John Chambers of Cisco Systems (4), Jeff Bezos of Amazon (7), Margaret Whitman of Ebay (8) and Eric Schmidt of Google (9). Schmidt was a member of Apple's board of directors until this summer, when a Federal Trade Commission investigation forced him to resign. During his tenure, Schmidt accepted thousands of dollars in Apple gear, but took no pay.
In November, Jobs was given the title "CEO of the Decade" by Fortune. The magazine lauded him for making Apple a groundbreaking technology leader and the most valuable company in Silicon Valley. Jobs was also a finalist for Time magazine's 2009 "Person of the Year."
Comments
Anyone with THIS kind of attitude when it comes to tech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOgOP_aqqtg
. . . is always someone to watch.
... Schmidt was a member of Apple's board of directors until this summer, when a Federal Trade Commission investigation forced him to resign. ...
I'm pretty sure this is false isn't it?
Isn't it the case that he was cleared of any problems, but then later *chose* to resign when Chrome came out?
The truly great leaders couldn't care less about any accolades or even the absence thereof. All that matters is "the game" and the next challenge on the horizon.
I'm very thankful and grateful for your many accomplishments through the products of your companies. We've all benefitted greatly.
Hope you have many more years of life and career.
ATT ... can you hear me now? Nope. Still don't have 3G.
I'm pretty sure this is false isn't it?
Isn't it the case that he was cleared of any problems, but then later *chose* to resign when Chrome came out?
That depends on how you look at it. To say that he was "forced" to resign is not strictly correct. Apple was facing an FTC investigation into potential conflicts of interest, which to my knowledge never actually occurred. Schmidt resigned before the FTC investigation was started.
Congratulations! Now please split the stock. Thank you.
Sincerely,
AAPL shareholder
That being said, the man has done nothing short of a miracle with his rebuilding of AAPL **and** Apple. Merry Christmas Steve and heres to a great new year!
Well, obviously!
Anyone with THIS kind of attitude when it comes to tech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOgOP_aqqtg
. . . is always someone to watch.
Perfect video of Steve. Clearly shows what kind of a man he is.
Where is STEVE BALLMER??? ROUNDING error??
Doesn't he deserve some kind of award, too? I mean, he is kinda indirectly responsible for Apple's recent success, too.
By the way, how did those "Laptop Hunter" ads go for ya, Microsoft? All they did was tell everyone what they already knew: Macs are cooler and more expensive than cheap crap.
Well, obviously!
Anyone with THIS kind of attitude when it comes to tech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOgOP_aqqtg
. . . is always someone to watch.
I work in the book publishing industry and Steve's comments about Microsoft not understanding propotional fonts really nails it for me. Nearly all high-end book production takes place on Macintoshes.
Let me tell you the "dark years" when Jobs was away was quite miserable.
Steve Jobs got his chance to "do it all over again" combined with a very nice Bush inspired credit/real estate bubble that occurred after Sept 11th tragedy really got Apple up where it is today.
Unfortunately there is a rough road ahead, the primary market for Apple's products, the US economy, isn't doing so hot in this Dem Congress caused, post sub-prime real estate bubble recession. (not many know it was really the Congress in 2005 that brought the government into the sub-prime mortgages and that Bush had to take over the two failed GSE's; Frannie and Freddie that Congress was using for their socialist experiment, but it's the truth).
Neither is nearly socialist Europe in very good shape. Also Steve's health..
Lately Apple has taken the path of milking it's customers for everything possible, combined with downright ignoring the needs of it's customers. I suspect this is the work of someone else running Apple, not Steve.
Apple has established small sideline businesses to offset the foreseen decrease in their prime hardware sales of computers, namely iTunes and the App Store.
Apple also dived into the portable player market and the smartphone market with much success.
Apple is in these markets because of Steve Jobs innovation drive, nearly everything rests upon his ability to see and create new markets or improve on failed ones.
Steve Jobs is a special person, like Walt Disney, he's very rare and nearly impossible to replace.
What confronts the Apple of the future is the lack of a established business model that can weather the test of time. They don't own any cable lines, they don't have significant computer market share and their devices get copied shortly after their released.
Apple is able to succeed because they have been able to out innovate the others, but it's not a solid and stable business plan and subject to natural forces of aging and accidents, even in the case of Rubenstein, to sell out.
Apple is too dependent upon the quality and creativity of it's people, the money Apple has would be better put to use buying some sort of infrastructure. Perhaps the operation in North Carolina is going to be part of that. Who knows.
But Apple is riding the end of a fad now, a time when credit flowed freely and people felt rich. The future is not the case, it's going to be hard times for many for many years. 10% unemployment will be the average for the next 10 years!!
Real estate will not make the equity it used to, which makes running a business much much more difficult. This and the competition from China, will make it rough going in Apple's primary markets for the next 10 years at least.
Japan still hasn't gotten out of the mess of their credit/real estate bubble of the 80's and the US and Europe doesn't have any new markets. It's Brazil, China and perhaps India going to be the economic engines and they are pretty much not needing anything from the US or Europe, or each other much for that matter.
So I see netbooks being the consumers computing device of choice. People want the net cheap and portable.
When smart phones get cheaper, then netbooks will die.
So I see netbooks being the consumers computing device of choice. People want the net cheap.
When smart phones get cheaper, then netbooks will die.
I see place for netbooks so i don?t think they will die out. I think they?ll evolve quite a bit as Atom evolves, but I see a place for cheap, small notebooks for kids, older people and others with very simple internet needs. I think Chrome OS will rejuvenate their sales come next holiday season and expect many home entertainment vendors to include Chrome OS as an optional way to get on the internet through your TV.
PS: I must be getting sick because your mention of the ?dark years? made me think of the ?The Dark Crystal? with Steve leaving Apple as crystal being broken, not to be whole again until Jobs returned. Why that popped into my head, I have no idea, but I don?t think it?s a good sign.
I work in the book publishing industry and Steve's comments about Microsoft not understanding propotional fonts really nails it for me. Nearly all high-end book production takes place on Macintoshes.
Sure most publishing is done on Mac but it has little to do with fonts. It is mostly a matter of historical personal preference by graphic artists and typographers. Almost all publishing is done with Quark or InDesign which are responsible for the text handling characteristics. The metrics are built into the typeface itself be it OpenType or Postscript, neither of which Apple had anything do do with in terms of creating a cross platform standard. If you create a Postscript file from either Windows or Mac using Quark or inDesign the output will be identical with respect to the type rendering.
Dave
Dear Steve,
Congratulations! Now please split the stock. Thank you.
Sincerely,
AAPL shareholder
You claim to be a shareholder, so I'm curious why you would want the stock to split. You do realize how stock splits work, right? Double the shares, but half the value per share. You're right back where you started, except now the stock is cheaper and there's more volatility. Ask Google or Berkshire Hathaway about stock splitting. Sorry to hear whatever mental block you have which makes you think two $100 shares is somehow better than one $200 share.