First off, it was not Apple's best quarter ever. It was a quarter with record revenue and record profits (by a narrow margin), but best quarter implies fundamentally improving underlying data... which there was none.
Secondly, the concern investors have is that the top line is structurally flattening; AAPL is at its peak profit point, where the price/unit mix for the iphone is no longer optimized.
If earnings are declining, the question to ask is how quickly, and what level of ongoing investment is required to sustain profits.
The reason to be long AAPL is not because they have a good pile of cash, or they seem to be able to make more each quarter-- it is that they have another game changer on the sidelines. Without that... "Apple is Doomed!"
The guy should be behind bars. If not for his ridiculous pink glasses, then at least for his illegal stock manipulation, if and when found guilty.
1) Nice qualifier. I like the fairness and thoughtfulness of your comment.
2) I'm not sure how one can prove without a shadow of a doubt that his purpose was to manipulate the stock. Perhaps a law stating that those that hold stock in certain companies can't comment on them in a professional manner, but I'm not even sure that would be fair or work.
First off, it was not Apple's best quarter ever. It was a quarter with record revenue and record profits (by a narrow margin), but best quarter implies fundamentally improving underlying data... which there was none.
Can you explain this in more detail and/or a different way? I can't help but see increased revenue and profit YoY on a per week basis as "fundamentally improving underlying data."
Sorry. But if you're the CEO, you're responsible and you answer to shareholders. Apple is no exception to the rules of corporate governance.
The stock has tanked. Shareholders like me are pissed (and I've lost nowhere near as much as some other people I know). If he doesn't have a feasible plan to get the stock price back up, then it's time for him to go. I thought Forestall successfully demonstrated that nobody at Apple is indispensable.
I should add that I do think the stock can recover. But I don't think the market belives that. The way prices are right now, it's as though the market thinks that Apple is the next Nokia. A bad assumption perhaps, but it's Mr. Cook's job to prove to show the market why it's wrong.
Why on earth should Tim Cook be removed as CEO when Apple showed record sales growth last quarter and will likely do it again this quarter? The only negative to report is that sales are slowing down and that Apple's profit may be lower this quarter than the year ago quarter. That means Apple is still profitable and making more money than all of its competitors combined. But that's not good enough for Wall Street and these douche bags who write such drivel.
You would think from all of the FUD out there that Apple was losing money, but it's not. Wall Street is in an uproar because Apple will not post record profits as they usually do. Okay, so what. I have been a long time Apple shareholder since the stock was at $20 per share. I always felt that they had the right vision and the right product focus, and that's what should matter here.
Wall Street can go F itself, Apple will continue doing what it's doing regardless of what Wall Street thinks. Apple is not here to make Wall Street happy. Apple is here to make killer products that is customers enjoy.
That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?
Sure, why not? It would be a great thing.
The day that a pro-Apple comment gets more thumbs down than an anti-Apple comment made by Samsung shills and other haters who frequent this site is the day that I would no longer visit here.
I don't think Tim Cook should be canned (yet), but I'm sick of Apple dropping the ball in so many areas --ie, the Mac Pro, all pro apps, iWork, etc. -- and not understanding that if you leave your customers without reasonable solutions for so long, you should at least have the decency talk to them about it, and talk about what you're going to do about it in the future.
But Fortress Apple can't bring itself to say anything, creating unnecessary angst for people who had previously put a tremendous amount of faith in the company. Tim has been in charge for long enough to address these issues, and he hasn't.
Even though I have stock in the company, I'm partially glad to see Apple laid low right now and glad to hear people suggest that the CEO should get the boot. I think there's been a complacency developing at Apple, an attitude that you can get away with doing sh*t work in one area as long as you do good work in an another area. That's arrogant, dangerous thinking, and I hope the stock price and calls for Cook's head help shake the company out of its stupor.
At what point does the SEC get involved and start investigating these comments & rumors, especially ones that have no basis in reality and have drastic effects on the stock value?
How do you know the rumors have no basis in reality? Plus, this is (just barely) a free country, and if one wants to say random things, one can. (by the way, it is far from clear that the Cook rumors depressed the stock price).
My problem with Cook is not his competency. I don't know enough to judge that, although do I worry slightly that his CFO and his Board may not be up to the job.
It is really with his complete silence, and seeming paralysis. I couldn't agree more with SJ when he said (quoted in the article) "I think we've done pretty well for our stockholders over the past decade, and I would just encourage them to trust us. Maybe we know what we're doing."
All Tim Cook needs to do is come out and say something that projects serious confidence along these lines. Not platitudes. Then back it up with serious action.
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5, multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations, and going on what, 8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
The stock value drops have been due to BS analyst talk not actual results, all those reports were BS 'sources' and not backed up by fact. The expectations were also generally from the analysts and based on the lint from the toilet paper they just wiped their butts with, not anything close to facts.
And it hasn't been 8 months since the last product came out. And so what? If the products aren't ready they aren't ready. Better, most buyers would say, to wait.
That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?
What I want is a more universal ignore and have it include columnists. So I can exclude folks and not see anything they write and not even replies that quote them. And not even a 'you can't see this post cause the writer is in your ignore list' just nothing.
The stock value drops have been due to BS analyst talk not actual results, all those reports were BS 'sources' and not backed up by fact. The expectations were also generally from the analysts and based on the lint from the toilet paper they just wiped their butts with, not anything close to facts.
And it hasn't been 8 months since the last product came out. And so what? If the products aren't ready they aren't ready. Better, most buyers would say, to wait.
You don't know what you are talking about. The analysts all had a buy rating on the stock at $700. The market did not listen.
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5, multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations, and going on what, 8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
While I feel bad for Cook in that it's true the positives outweigh the negatives, and that this wouldn't be a problem if it were any other company and not Apple, it's not any other company and it IS Apple. Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard. Frankly, the longer this slide goes on, the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy. One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?) had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.
It is easy to use a keyboard to tell the world what is ailing Apple and what is exactly ailing Apple.
Is the apple of today any different from the one 8 months ago.
Are their products selling poorly.
Whatever you had been fed come from rumors put out by the used to be respectable media and guess works of analysts who used to be wrong in trying to guess how much miney Apple is making quarter after quarter.
They is nothing fundamentally wrong with Apple except the FUD from pundits, analysts and media and iHaters.
Btw any company would love to have the problems of Apple especially the billions they are making every quarter.
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5, multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations, and going on what, 8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
While I feel bad for Cook in that it's true the positives outweigh the negatives, and that this wouldn't be a problem if it were any other company and not Apple, it's not any other company and it IS Apple. Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard. Frankly, the longer this slide goes on, the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy. One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?) had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.
Let's break down your post line by line- because frankly I sometimes find it hard to believe there's a functional, rational adult on the other side of the keyboard. It's mind-numbing.
Quote:
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5
I like how the entire point of this article - which was that Apple's stock price has been completely disconnected from it's actual performance- and how the CEO does not dictate stock price- went completely over your head. To respond to the article, you simply parrot the line the article was addressing in the first place. Brilliant.
Quote:
multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations,
"Reports", "not meeting expectations".. there we go again. In the entire history of Apple, analysts have been phenomenally wrong about everything, every single time. Commentators on tech blogs and fan sites are consistently MUCH more accurate at predicting quarterly results than analysts have been. Yet, even though we have evidence of analysts being spectacularly wrong so consistently, suddenly Apple- not the analysts- should be punished when they're wrong. Because these analysts pull numbers out of their asses- numbers that are at odds with Apple's own guidance- it's APPLE that should be held accountable when numbers don't match up, not the people who predicted these numbers based on flimsy premises. Gotcha. After years of consistently underestimating results and being wrong, these analysts suddenly decided to over-compensate on their predictions, and Apple, of course, needs to be punished for not "meeting expectations", or, put in another way, for having some of the best sales, revenues, and profit of any company on planet earth- but, oh dear, not to the "expectations" of these hacks who are never right about anything. Am I doing ok so far?
Quote:
8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
The hell are you talking about? It's been 6 months to the day that the iPad mini/ iPad 4 has been released. Since then, there's been hardware updates like the Macbook Pro, etc. Why did you decide to tack on another 2 months from your ass? Oh yeah, cause it sounds more sensational. You seem to be a very reliable, objective individual.
Quote:
Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard.
..As do I. I hold Apple to a higher standard than any other company in the tech industry, because I've had the best experiences with Apple products and so many abysmal experiences with so many others. Yet, I still am sane enough to hold Apple to standards in the context of, oh I don't know, other companies on planet earth. Apple may be "failing" or "spiralling downhill" compared to some other companies on another planet- but here on earth, Apple is still one of the most (if not the most) successful companies in existence. There is a "higher standard" then there is an "irrational, insane, and absurd standard that flies in the face of all market physics and dynamics and is untenebale and unsustainable" which is the "standard" that some people disconnected from reality, or with alternate agendas, hold Apple to.
Quote:
the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy....had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.
Probably the most absurd statement in your entire post, because of it's massive irony, hypocrisy, and self-contradiction.
So let me get this straight- Tim should have stayed where he was to "focus on what he does best", yet Ive, who has consistently showed that he has little interest in anything except being focused on design, should have been pulled out of that role, and put in the position of CEO and all the bullshit than entails, distracting him from what is arguable the most critical role in the company. Ive hates to show up in keynotes, and refuses to do them. What makes you think he would be well positioned to deal with the bullshit of investors, and a million other things as CEO? How the hell would Apple be benefitted from the worlds most famous designer being pulled away from being a designer? Why would Steve Jobs have not recommended Ive for the role, since he and Ive were clearly extremely close and obviously SJ knew what Ive was good at? Maybe cause SJ didn't think Ive was fit for the role, or, even more importantly, Ive didn't want the role?
Also, what makes you believe with Ive as CEO we would be getting products faster, which is something you've bitched about? How does that logic work? Does Ive strike you as the kind of person that would rush to put out products? Beyond that, what evidence do you ahve that Tim Cook is not letting Ive have his way and affording him te timeframe he needs? Or do you think that Cook has also taken on design responsibilities as CEO, and has stripped Ive of this role? Do you think that just MAYBE we haven't seen major new products in a few months because Ive is now responsible for BOTH hardware AND software, and just MAYBE the delay is on his end, with his massively increased responsibilities along with his legendary obsession with perfection? No, clearly the blame is on Cook, who just decide to launch a new product on his own terms and tell Ive to "just hurry up and finish the fucking thing already, screw quality, I don't care if it isn't finished" so they can release an unfinished product in a desperate attempt to satisfy the stock, and people like you. Oh, but maybe if Ive also had the responsibilities of CEO along with his role as a software/hardware designer, he'd manage to get shit done even quicker, right? Brilliant. Thank God Tim is infinitely wiser than people like you, who, if you had any say in Apple's inner workings, would have driven the company into the ground a long time ago with that philosophy.
Your "conclusion" that Ive "should have taken the big chair" is so ridiculously contradictory in every single way going by your logic. You want the person most intimately responsible for Apple's product design to take the responsibilities of CEO- do you have any idea what that kind of position entails? You want Ive spending his time on phone calls, responding to emails, management bullshit, attending shareholder meetings, flying across the world, - instead of working on actual products? Hey, maybe he could fit that in at the end of the week or something, right? Yet you claim to want whats best for Apple as a company? Unreal.
Quote:
One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?)
The iMac had some issues in initial production, which has been sorted out now. Apple has never, ever had issues like that in it's history, under SJ. Never. Not once. Nope. Am I doing this right?
How much was Apple's bottom line and performance affected by the iMac delay, that you put so much weight on? It's no doubt negligible. What about all the other products launched in 2012, which had flawless launches in massive numbers, the smoothest of any in Apple's history? The 4 million iPhone 5s in a weekend? What other company in the world can pull that off? Record breaking iPad mini launch? Launch of retina Macbooks? Oh right, those don't count. We'll take the one product which had issues and magnify that to prove Cook's incompetence, right? Cook's mastery and expertise of the supply chain is well known, but because 100% of Apple's products don't have 100% perfect launches 100% of the time, the guy is a failure and an embarrassment at that role.
Oh, and well done on parroting an unconfirmed, unsubstantiated rumor. (was it 5 million? 8? Oh who cares, obviously you will use the bigger #). When you have to do this to support a point, you didn't have a point to begin with. There should be enough evidence in CONFIRMED facts to support an argument, without you being relegated to parroting negative rumors (which have historically turned out to be overwhelmingly false) in order to make conclusions to fit your agenda. Even if this is true, is Cook the one manually checking every phone? What kind of logic do you have to use to assume this kind of incident would not have happened under Jobs, or anyone else? None.
Your post is honestly one of the worst examples of everything that is wrong with mindlessly structuring an argument based on straw men, logical fallacies, self-contradiction, unsubstantiated reports, all to support an obvious agenda without even a hint of irony. Not a single thing you typed is even reasonably thought you, and it's embarrassing and telling that this type of irrational reasoning is what all the attacks against Cook have been mainly composed of.
Cook does not get credit for anything. Great results are dismissed as Apple being on "auto-pilot", while it's "off with Cook's head" when the narrative is not so positive (even while the results are still great).
Wall Street can go F itself, Apple will continue doing what it's doing regardless of what Wall Street thinks. Apple is not here to make Wall Street happy. Apple is here to make killer products that is customers enjoy.
Do you think we are starting to see a saturation in the iDevice category? What is the next big thing? Can Cook really steer the company in a new direction? There is no question the iPhone/iPad was a revolution but can they really sustain the company on asking the faithful to upgrade every two years?
The iWatch, iTV, iCar all seem like lackluster product concepts if they even exist.
Cook has had a rough 6-8 months with all the controversies, like Maps, warrantees, patent suits, management shake ups, stock collapse, software outages, the secretive silence, etc. The low hanging fruit has already been plucked. What is going to get them turned around? I view the current management and BOD as a bit tired and out of new ideas. If they can't provide the vision for the future, how do they expect the shareholders to have any confidence in their ability to execute?
It really is about the share price at this point and that is not going to turn around until they announce some killer new product.
Comments
Secondly, the concern investors have is that the top line is structurally flattening; AAPL is at its peak profit point, where the price/unit mix for the iphone is no longer optimized.
If earnings are declining, the question to ask is how quickly, and what level of ongoing investment is required to sustain profits.
The reason to be long AAPL is not because they have a good pile of cash, or they seem to be able to make more each quarter-- it is that they have another game changer on the sidelines. Without that... "Apple is Doomed!"
Last comment only slightly sarcastic.
1) Nice qualifier. I like the fairness and thoughtfulness of your comment.
2) I'm not sure how one can prove without a shadow of a doubt that his purpose was to manipulate the stock. Perhaps a law stating that those that hold stock in certain companies can't comment on them in a professional manner, but I'm not even sure that would be fair or work.
That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?
Can you explain this in more detail and/or a different way? I can't help but see increased revenue and profit YoY on a per week basis as "fundamentally improving underlying data."
To be next to S. Jobs at the head of Apple is not a small task. And only for that (I have other reasons too) I admire Cook.
Sorry. But if you're the CEO, you're responsible and you answer to shareholders. Apple is no exception to the rules of corporate governance.
The stock has tanked. Shareholders like me are pissed (and I've lost nowhere near as much as some other people I know). If he doesn't have a feasible plan to get the stock price back up, then it's time for him to go. I thought Forestall successfully demonstrated that nobody at Apple is indispensable.
I should add that I do think the stock can recover. But I don't think the market belives that. The way prices are right now, it's as though the market thinks that Apple is the next Nokia. A bad assumption perhaps, but it's Mr. Cook's job to prove to show the market why it's wrong.
You would think from all of the FUD out there that Apple was losing money, but it's not. Wall Street is in an uproar because Apple will not post record profits as they usually do. Okay, so what. I have been a long time Apple shareholder since the stock was at $20 per share. I always felt that they had the right vision and the right product focus, and that's what should matter here.
Wall Street can go F itself, Apple will continue doing what it's doing regardless of what Wall Street thinks. Apple is not here to make Wall Street happy. Apple is here to make killer products that is customers enjoy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney
That would result in a competition among trolls to get the highest number of thumbs down. Is that what you really want?
Sure, why not? It would be a great thing.
The day that a pro-Apple comment gets more thumbs down than an anti-Apple comment made by Samsung shills and other haters who frequent this site is the day that I would no longer visit here.
But Fortress Apple can't bring itself to say anything, creating unnecessary angst for people who had previously put a tremendous amount of faith in the company. Tim has been in charge for long enough to address these issues, and he hasn't.
Even though I have stock in the company, I'm partially glad to see Apple laid low right now and glad to hear people suggest that the CEO should get the boot. I think there's been a complacency developing at Apple, an attitude that you can get away with doing sh*t work in one area as long as you do good work in an another area. That's arrogant, dangerous thinking, and I hope the stock price and calls for Cook's head help shake the company out of its stupor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan
At what point does the SEC get involved and start investigating these comments & rumors, especially ones that have no basis in reality and have drastic effects on the stock value?
How do you know the rumors have no basis in reality? Plus, this is (just barely) a free country, and if one wants to say random things, one can. (by the way, it is far from clear that the Cook rumors depressed the stock price).
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
So which of the members of the board of directors could be named Interim CEO should they sack Cook?
Iger
It is really with his complete silence, and seeming paralysis. I couldn't agree more with SJ when he said (quoted in the article) "I think we've done pretty well for our stockholders over the past decade, and I would just encourage them to trust us. Maybe we know what we're doing."
All Tim Cook needs to do is come out and say something that projects serious confidence along these lines. Not platitudes. Then back it up with serious action.
The stock value drops have been due to BS analyst talk not actual results, all those reports were BS 'sources' and not backed up by fact. The expectations were also generally from the analysts and based on the lint from the toilet paper they just wiped their butts with, not anything close to facts.
And it hasn't been 8 months since the last product came out. And so what? If the products aren't ready they aren't ready. Better, most buyers would say, to wait.
What I want is a more universal ignore and have it include columnists. So I can exclude folks and not see anything they write and not even replies that quote them. And not even a 'you can't see this post cause the writer is in your ignore list' just nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
The stock value drops have been due to BS analyst talk not actual results, all those reports were BS 'sources' and not backed up by fact. The expectations were also generally from the analysts and based on the lint from the toilet paper they just wiped their butts with, not anything close to facts.
And it hasn't been 8 months since the last product came out. And so what? If the products aren't ready they aren't ready. Better, most buyers would say, to wait.
You don't know what you are talking about. The analysts all had a buy rating on the stock at $700. The market did not listen.
It is easy to use a keyboard to tell the world what is ailing Apple and what is exactly ailing Apple.
Is the apple of today any different from the one 8 months ago.
Are their products selling poorly.
Whatever you had been fed come from rumors put out by the used to be respectable media and guess works of analysts who used to be wrong in trying to guess how much miney Apple is making quarter after quarter.
They is nothing fundamentally wrong with Apple except the FUD from pundits, analysts and media and iHaters.
Btw any company would love to have the problems of Apple especially the billions they are making every quarter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5, multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations, and going on what, 8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
While I feel bad for Cook in that it's true the positives outweigh the negatives, and that this wouldn't be a problem if it were any other company and not Apple, it's not any other company and it IS Apple. Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard. Frankly, the longer this slide goes on, the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy. One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?) had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.
Let's break down your post line by line- because frankly I sometimes find it hard to believe there's a functional, rational adult on the other side of the keyboard. It's mind-numbing.
Quote:
Well let's see: the stock has been in a relative free-fall since peaking around the release of the iPhone 5
I like how the entire point of this article - which was that Apple's stock price has been completely disconnected from it's actual performance- and how the CEO does not dictate stock price- went completely over your head. To respond to the article, you simply parrot the line the article was addressing in the first place. Brilliant.
Quote:
multiple reports of sales, stock, and revenue not meeting expectations,
"Reports", "not meeting expectations".. there we go again. In the entire history of Apple, analysts have been phenomenally wrong about everything, every single time. Commentators on tech blogs and fan sites are consistently MUCH more accurate at predicting quarterly results than analysts have been. Yet, even though we have evidence of analysts being spectacularly wrong so consistently, suddenly Apple- not the analysts- should be punished when they're wrong. Because these analysts pull numbers out of their asses- numbers that are at odds with Apple's own guidance- it's APPLE that should be held accountable when numbers don't match up, not the people who predicted these numbers based on flimsy premises. Gotcha. After years of consistently underestimating results and being wrong, these analysts suddenly decided to over-compensate on their predictions, and Apple, of course, needs to be punished for not "meeting expectations", or, put in another way, for having some of the best sales, revenues, and profit of any company on planet earth- but, oh dear, not to the "expectations" of these hacks who are never right about anything. Am I doing ok so far?
Quote:
8 months now without a single new product or announcement.
The hell are you talking about? It's been 6 months to the day that the iPad mini/ iPad 4 has been released. Since then, there's been hardware updates like the Macbook Pro, etc. Why did you decide to tack on another 2 months from your ass? Oh yeah, cause it sounds more sensational. You seem to be a very reliable, objective individual.
Quote:
Fair or not, the public and the market both hold Tim and the company both to a higher standard.
..As do I. I hold Apple to a higher standard than any other company in the tech industry, because I've had the best experiences with Apple products and so many abysmal experiences with so many others. Yet, I still am sane enough to hold Apple to standards in the context of, oh I don't know, other companies on planet earth. Apple may be "failing" or "spiralling downhill" compared to some other companies on another planet- but here on earth, Apple is still one of the most (if not the most) successful companies in existence. There is a "higher standard" then there is an "irrational, insane, and absurd standard that flies in the face of all market physics and dynamics and is untenebale and unsustainable" which is the "standard" that some people disconnected from reality, or with alternate agendas, hold Apple to.
Quote:
the clearer it becomes to me that Ive should have taken the big chair, and Cook should have stayed where he was and continued on as the logistics guy....had Cook been focused on what he does best instead of trying to replicate what Jobs and to a lesser extent Ive apparently do naturally.
Probably the most absurd statement in your entire post, because of it's massive irony, hypocrisy, and self-contradiction.
So let me get this straight- Tim should have stayed where he was to "focus on what he does best", yet Ive, who has consistently showed that he has little interest in anything except being focused on design, should have been pulled out of that role, and put in the position of CEO and all the bullshit than entails, distracting him from what is arguable the most critical role in the company. Ive hates to show up in keynotes, and refuses to do them. What makes you think he would be well positioned to deal with the bullshit of investors, and a million other things as CEO? How the hell would Apple be benefitted from the worlds most famous designer being pulled away from being a designer? Why would Steve Jobs have not recommended Ive for the role, since he and Ive were clearly extremely close and obviously SJ knew what Ive was good at? Maybe cause SJ didn't think Ive was fit for the role, or, even more importantly, Ive didn't want the role?
Also, what makes you believe with Ive as CEO we would be getting products faster, which is something you've bitched about? How does that logic work? Does Ive strike you as the kind of person that would rush to put out products? Beyond that, what evidence do you ahve that Tim Cook is not letting Ive have his way and affording him te timeframe he needs? Or do you think that Cook has also taken on design responsibilities as CEO, and has stripped Ive of this role? Do you think that just MAYBE we haven't seen major new products in a few months because Ive is now responsible for BOTH hardware AND software, and just MAYBE the delay is on his end, with his massively increased responsibilities along with his legendary obsession with perfection? No, clearly the blame is on Cook, who just decide to launch a new product on his own terms and tell Ive to "just hurry up and finish the fucking thing already, screw quality, I don't care if it isn't finished" so they can release an unfinished product in a desperate attempt to satisfy the stock, and people like you. Oh, but maybe if Ive also had the responsibilities of CEO along with his role as a software/hardware designer, he'd manage to get shit done even quicker, right? Brilliant. Thank God Tim is infinitely wiser than people like you, who, if you had any say in Apple's inner workings, would have driven the company into the ground a long time ago with that philosophy.
Your "conclusion" that Ive "should have taken the big chair" is so ridiculously contradictory in every single way going by your logic. You want the person most intimately responsible for Apple's product design to take the responsibilities of CEO- do you have any idea what that kind of position entails? You want Ive spending his time on phone calls, responding to emails, management bullshit, attending shareholder meetings, flying across the world, - instead of working on actual products? Hey, maybe he could fit that in at the end of the week or something, right? Yet you claim to want whats best for Apple as a company? Unreal.
Quote:
One can only wonder if that supply chain problems that have plagued the iMac line and recently the iPhone line (8 million defectives returned to Foxconn? What's that about, and who is getting fired over that screw up?)
The iMac had some issues in initial production, which has been sorted out now. Apple has never, ever had issues like that in it's history, under SJ. Never. Not once. Nope. Am I doing this right?
How much was Apple's bottom line and performance affected by the iMac delay, that you put so much weight on? It's no doubt negligible. What about all the other products launched in 2012, which had flawless launches in massive numbers, the smoothest of any in Apple's history? The 4 million iPhone 5s in a weekend? What other company in the world can pull that off? Record breaking iPad mini launch? Launch of retina Macbooks? Oh right, those don't count. We'll take the one product which had issues and magnify that to prove Cook's incompetence, right? Cook's mastery and expertise of the supply chain is well known, but because 100% of Apple's products don't have 100% perfect launches 100% of the time, the guy is a failure and an embarrassment at that role.
Oh, and well done on parroting an unconfirmed, unsubstantiated rumor. (was it 5 million? 8? Oh who cares, obviously you will use the bigger #). When you have to do this to support a point, you didn't have a point to begin with. There should be enough evidence in CONFIRMED facts to support an argument, without you being relegated to parroting negative rumors (which have historically turned out to be overwhelmingly false) in order to make conclusions to fit your agenda. Even if this is true, is Cook the one manually checking every phone? What kind of logic do you have to use to assume this kind of incident would not have happened under Jobs, or anyone else? None.
Your post is honestly one of the worst examples of everything that is wrong with mindlessly structuring an argument based on straw men, logical fallacies, self-contradiction, unsubstantiated reports, all to support an obvious agenda without even a hint of irony. Not a single thing you typed is even reasonably thought you, and it's embarrassing and telling that this type of irrational reasoning is what all the attacks against Cook have been mainly composed of.
Cook does not get credit for anything. Great results are dismissed as Apple being on "auto-pilot", while it's "off with Cook's head" when the narrative is not so positive (even while the results are still great).
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist
Wall Street can go F itself, Apple will continue doing what it's doing regardless of what Wall Street thinks. Apple is not here to make Wall Street happy. Apple is here to make killer products that is customers enjoy.
Do you think we are starting to see a saturation in the iDevice category? What is the next big thing? Can Cook really steer the company in a new direction? There is no question the iPhone/iPad was a revolution but can they really sustain the company on asking the faithful to upgrade every two years?
The iWatch, iTV, iCar all seem like lackluster product concepts if they even exist.
Cook has had a rough 6-8 months with all the controversies, like Maps, warrantees, patent suits, management shake ups, stock collapse, software outages, the secretive silence, etc. The low hanging fruit has already been plucked. What is going to get them turned around? I view the current management and BOD as a bit tired and out of new ideas. If they can't provide the vision for the future, how do they expect the shareholders to have any confidence in their ability to execute?
It really is about the share price at this point and that is not going to turn around until they announce some killer new product.