Apple Board of Directors reelected with 95% support at annual shareholder meeting

Posted:
in AAPL Investors edited March 2015
Apple's annual shareholder meeting was held at its corporate campus on Tuesday, and went by largely without any surprises, as the company's board of directors was reelected with near-universal support from shareholders, while other initiatives were rejected.




The Apple Board of Directors all retained their positions with 95 percent voting in favor, it was revealed at the meeting, where AppleInsider was in attendance.

Another shareholder amendment demanding that the company disclose how much more money it is spending in its pursuit of alternative energy was soundly rejected, with less than 2 percent support from shareholders.

Another amendment to Apple's employee stock purchase program was approved without any discussion at all. No details were given about potential revisions to Apple's quarterly dividends and share buyback program, which are expected to be revised in next month's quarterly earnings call.

There was also a proposal to allow shareholders to pick board members, but this also failed to pass with less than 40 percent support. Some major shareholders said it was irrelevant because Apple is already working on such a plan.

In comments made at the meeting, Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook talked about his company and IBM are exploring more opportunities together. The two companies have partnered on an iOS enterprise initiative, which has seen IBM develop business-focused applications and implement iPhones and iPads in various industries.

Speaking about the potential of a closer relationship with IBM, Cook said that "the conduit is wide open," and noted that Big Blue is "not in the business we are in." He also praised IBM's "knowledge of verticals" and its "go-to-market team" in his comments to shareholders.

A few present at the meeting attempted to press Cook into making comments about Tesla, or even buying the electric automobile maker. Cook unsurprisingly avoided those questions, but at one point said he does hope that Tesla will implement CarPlay support into future vehicles.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    I voted as per Apple's recommendations. I'm not hubristic enough to believe I better know how to run Apple than they do.
  • Reply 2 of 15
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?

    slurpy wrote: »
    I voted as per Apple's recommendations. I'm not hubristic enough to believe I better know how to run Apple than they do.

    It seems more shareholders agree with you.
  • Reply 3 of 15
    dickprinterdickprinter Posts: 1,060member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?

    It seems more shareholders agree with you.

    Anyone notice Al Gore in the audience during the keynote? He looks like he's ready to pop.

  • Reply 4 of 15
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Why no news about Apple allowing "the reverend" Jesse Jackson to speak at the shareholder meeting?

     

    What kind of BS is that? And no, I do not approve of Apple cozying up to such characters.

  • Reply 5 of 15
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?

    I assume they are alleged stockholders who have been beating the "Apple Watch = Tim Cook's failure = Jony Ive's Newton = I miss the Apple of Steve Jobs = I can't wear it in the shower deal breaker" troll narrative of late.
  • Reply 6 of 15
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?

     

    I didn't realise that Benjamin Frost owned so many shares. :)

  • Reply 7 of 15
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

    Why no news about Apple allowing "the reverend" Jesse Jackson to speak at the shareholder meeting?

     

    What kind of BS is that? And no, I do not approve of Apple cozying up to such characters.




    Are you kidding me? Jackson was given a platform to peddle his BS? Completely disgusting and unacceptable.

  • Reply 8 of 15
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?



    I guess some people have a deeper knowledge of each board member, though I gotta agree - under the present circumstances it is hard to fault the board. There is the Al Gore factor of course, and there are number of people who strongly disapproves of his general existence on this board. Admittedly this board probably has very little influence on the Apple board. 

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    I assume they are alleged stockholders who have been beating the "Apple Watch = Tim Cook's failure = Jony Ive's Newton = I miss the Apple of Steve Jobs = I can't wear it in the shower deal breaker" troll narrative of late.



    Oh yeah, some of them frequent this joint. :(

  • Reply 9 of 15
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,093member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

     

    Anyone notice Al Gore in the audience during the keynote? He looks like he's ready to pop.




    Perhaps he's sequestering some large methane deposits? :/

  • Reply 10 of 15
    davendaven Posts: 696member

    Oops... I forgot to vote.

  • Reply 11 of 15
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    Al Gore is on Apple's board because of his planetary vision, in addition to his experience in geopolitics. Steve Jobs also had the kind of vision, not so much in the geopolitical sense.

    I'm glad to see he's going to get his Earth observatory in space.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/al-gore-weighs-in-on-sunday-s-long-delayed-earth-observatory-launch/

    I had thought Apple might provide the backing to push it through. Maybe they could put up another one to give us a parallax view for 3D. Anyway, soon we'll be able to watch a near real-time view of our home on our phones. And watches
  • Reply 12 of 15
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post



    Al Gore is on Apple's board because of his planetary vision, in addition to his experience in geopolitics. Steve Jobs also had the kind of vision, not so much in the geopolitical sense.



    I'm glad to see he's going to get his Earth observatory in space.



    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/al-gore-weighs-in-on-sunday-s-long-delayed-earth-observatory-launch/



    I had thought Apple might provide the backing to push it through. Maybe they could put up another one to give us a parallax view for 3D. Anyway, soon we'll be able to watch a near real-time view of our home on our phones. And watches



    Although I disagree with many of his political ideas, I used to respect Gore. He probably would've been a better president than Bush, although it would be better for the country if America elected a non-Republican, non-Democrat candidate.

  • Reply 13 of 15
    richl wrote: »
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I'm curious about the 5% that didn't want to keep the current board members. Would issue could they possibly have?

    I didn't realise that Benjamin Frost owned so many shares. :)

    Hey, when you're still living in your mother's basement, what do you have to spend your money on?
  • Reply 14 of 15
    Wow! The comments here about Al Gore and Jesse Jackson seem to suggest we've got Fox News types here.I would not have thought anyone intelligent enough to like Apple could be a Fox News ignoramus
  • Reply 15 of 15
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    nicksg wrote: »
    Wow! The comments here about Al Gore and Jesse Jackson seem to suggest we've got Fox News types here.I would not have thought anyone intelligent enough to like Apple could be a Fox News ignoramus

    That would be a lazy assumption on your part. Should I assume you are a Hillary Clinton 2016 shill based on your post? Of course not.
Sign In or Register to comment.