6502

fastasleep said:

StrangeDays said:

6502 said:

rogifan_new said:

6502 said:

Ha ha ha! Like I said in this thread (https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/209292/apples-experiential-retail-success-lies-in-improving-a-customers-life-claims-angela-ah/p4) she was useless and accomplished nothing. But, she raked in $100's of millions and we're left with $1,400 iphones and lousy macs in her wake. Tim Cook does not look good after two major retail hiring fails.

The head of retail has nothing to do with the price of iPhones or how Macs are designed.

It does when the money spent on her and her dumb ideas could have been much better spent.

What dumb ideas do you attribute to her? Who would you have wanted hired instead?

A man, clearly.

@6502: "I never said there aren't women employees at Apple. Angela is the token woman they drag out the most to say "look, we have women in leadership at Apple". She's accomplished nothing of significance at Apple, yet brings in a massive salary and pays retail employees crap. The only other one they drag out is Lisa Jackson who says the same thing every time on how environmentally friendly their products are. Yeah, we get it. And wow, Apple has a female head of HR; I've rarely seen a company that doesn't have a female head of HR."

Apple just "drags out" women who have no skills or credentials and accomplish nothing, according to this guy.

fastasleep said:

StrangeDays said:

6502 said:

rogifan_new said:

larryjw said:

crofford said:

StayPuftZombie said:

What would be great is if Deidre is temporary and they convince Ron Johnson to come back. He was great at this role. Apple would be lucky to get him back.

Yes - Ron was outstanding. He would’ve saved JCPenney with more time...and a better interim plan. 

Johnson was saddle with a brain-dead Board. JCP will be the next retailer to file for Chapter 7/11. 

Johnson was the moron who changed pricing before he changed the stores (and with it the clientele). It was the same people shopping there but now without the coupons/sales and very confusing pricing structure. Anyone with half a brain could’ve seen that was a disaster waiting to happen. 

The pricing structure was not confusing at all, in fact if I remember right it was very simple at $20, $30 or $40 per item. He got rid of the constant coupons and timing of sales, etc. It seemed like a great idea, but apparently people like buying $40 items with a 50% off coupon rather than just paying $20 for the item.

Yeah, this was perplexing. I don’t shop at JCP tho. 

This is a pretty well known phenomenon. A friend of mine ran a business where he would get complaints about prices, so he raised the price 20% and offered 20% off coupons and stopped hearing complaints. Go figure.

rogifan_new said:

larryjw said:

crofford said:

StayPuftZombie said:

What would be great is if Deidre is temporary and they convince Ron Johnson to come back. He was great at this role. Apple would be lucky to get him back.

Yes - Ron was outstanding. He would’ve saved JCPenney with more time...and a better interim plan. 

Johnson was saddle with a brain-dead Board. JCP will be the next retailer to file for Chapter 7/11. 

Johnson was the moron who changed pricing before he changed the stores (and with it the clientele). It was the same people shopping there but now without the coupons/sales and very confusing pricing structure. Anyone with half a brain could’ve seen that was a disaster waiting to happen. 

fastasleep said:

@6502 ;
"Please, get off your high horse, most Americans have never heard of this luxury English department store or "fashion house". Now go drive off your pretend Rolls Royce to your pretend reality. Say hi to the queen for me."

Bull fucking shit, they're a huge brand, and all signs point to her killing it at that job. She's literally one of the most powerful business people in the world and you're writing her off because of your own ignorance and bigotry. Given your rampant sexism and condescending tone, I'm almost willing to bet money you're the thankfully banned Tallest Skil back under a new nom de plume. 

randominternetperson said:

6502 said:

randominternetperson said:

6502 said:

randominternetperson said:

6502 said:

fastasleep said:

@6502 ;
The rest that you mention are just minor iterative updates that would happen whether she was there or not. I never said I have a problem with a woman earning more than I do, why would you assume that?

It's cute that you think a retail organization of over 500 stores employing 70,000 people in 27 countries is just something that runs itself.

As for your second point, you literally said:

Remind me how she is deserving of this? She is simply the token woman at Apple.

If you don't see the inherent sexism in that statement about one of the most successful retail executives in the world, I'm not sure anyone here can help you. But you're 100% wrong.

It's cute that you think Angela is changing light bulbs at the apple stores. The apple stores do run themselves, just like your engine does after turning the key. Of course all that had to be set up but that was done by Ron Johnson not Angela. Besides, Angela was not hired to manage the day to day operations of the apple store but to plan the long term strategy, of which she's done nothing. The apple stores are fundamentally no different than they were when Johnson set them up.

I'm sorry you're a SJW snowflake and can't handle the truth. Apple was heavily criticized by investors and (mostly) the press about not having enough women in the higher ups. So they went out on a women hiring spree. Angela even admitted in an interview that she told Tim Cook that she's not very good at retail but just happened to hire good people. No man would ever get hired in retail after saying that. Same for Lisa Jackson, she just recycles the same slides showing the iPhone to be highly recyclable and bromine free, etc... She was hired more for her Obama connections than anything else. Both these women make a crap load of money for doing next to nothing.

Do you enjoy being a troll?

Everything you've said in this thread is either flat out wrong or moves the goalpost of the "debate."

WTF is arguing whether AA is better or worse than Ron Johnson?  That's like saying (as trolls do) that Tim Cook isn't the CEO that Jobs was.  Guess what?  Jobs is dead and Ron Johnson quit.  Your arguments that "she's done nothing" and that the retail experience is worse are easily countered.  If you read the article it lists of number of significant changes that have happened on her watch--at hear initiative.  To name just one more example, the "flagship store" concept was greatly expanded.  The original Apple Stores were mostly cookie cutters.  Now there are an increasing number of distinctive mega stores that are as much community centers than stores (to improve the brand and help people understand and appreciate the Apple way).  If you believe the story, she personally identified the Carnegie Library Apple Store possibility.  That was an outside-the-box idea; it's a quasi-public building that was sitting mostly unused on a great site, not it wasn't being pitched to developers as a retail possibility.  

If you want to know more about AA and why Apple poached her from Burberry and why she is so well compensated and respected by the other Apple execs, how about you spend 10 minutes Googling her name and reading just a few of the articles.  That fact that no one has personally invited you to spend a month in her shoes seeing exactly what decisions she makes and how she empowers/motivates others to perform isn't my problem.  I, for one, trust that Tim Cook and others don't just trot her out as a pretty face to assuage "investors and the press" who want to see more women in positions of authority.  She has experiences, insights, and a track record of success in areas that he Apple colleagues don't have.  Diversity means bringing together different skills and perspectives to create something better than would be possible from a team of clones.  I'm sorry that you don't get this.

If speaking the truth is being a troll, then yes, I guess I do enjoy being one. I can't say it more succinctly than this: she has made $100's of millions with little to nothing to show for it (all while her employees make crap). I could care less about the Carnegie Library Apple store. I'm not going to travel to DC to see an apple store, I know what an iPhone, iPad and Macbook look like. It's not a museum. Apple stores are not community centers; you can't book one for weddings or meetings, and who would want to hang out all day at an Apple store? It's ludicrous. I've read many articles on her, including the one where she flat out told Cook that "I'm not good at retail, I just hired really good people". You try that at your next interview. And, don't forget, Tim also hired John Browett, so he doesn't always have the best judgement. Apple was routinely bashed in the press for not hiring enough women and the next thing you know they're trotting out Angela and Bozoma. Diversity means hiring people based on their gender and skin color first and talent level second. I'd rather hire people based on their talent, irrespective of their gender, race or religion.

It's not her job to convince the public that she, personally had done great things.  I don't know what Jonny Ive has done personally, do you?  How about any of the other big name Apple employees?  What has Cook done?

Their stratospheric compensation has come about because it's given in the form of stock options.  If the stock price hasn't risen they wouldn't have made "hundreds of millions of dollars."  That's call aligning the interest of executives with those of key stakeholders.

If you don't "care about" Apple's retail strategy, then of course you aren't giving credit to the person heading up that effort.  Maybe I don't care about wearables, so I won't credit anyone for the Apple Watch.

If I have a track record of success at the highest levels of business, and I'm recruited for an executive position, I can't see how saying that "I just hired really good people" is going to hurt me one bit.  Hiring really good people (and helping them thrive) is the single most important thing an executive can do.  But don't listen to me, here's what someone else said about this:  "I disagree totally. I think [hiring people is] the most important job.".  https://recruitloop.com/blog/steve-jobs-top-hiring-tip-hire-the-best/ ;

Tim Cook hired John Browett and then promptly fired him.  That seems like evidence that Cook is a demanding boss who doesn't tolerate bozos who don't bring anything to the table.  That tells me something about AA.

"Diversity means hiring people based on their gender and skin color first and talent level second."  Yeah, no.  That's not what it means.

Jonny Ive runs the design department and we see the results of that work in the products apple sells. Craig runs software and we see his results in iOS and macOS. Tim Cook runs the company and we see the results of that in Apple's stock price among other areas. Angela runs retail and we (should) see the result of that in apple's retail stores.

I know the executive's compensation comes mainly from stock options but apple is not a startup on series A funding. Angela didn't quit her CEO job at burberry thinking it was a 50-50 chance her apple stock options might be worthless when they vest, she knew damn well they'd be worth many many millions or she wouldn't have taken the job. She's incompetent, yes, but not stupid. And, are you really justifying a small number of executives making $100M's while apple store retail employees make shit? 

If her main skill is hiring good people, perhaps she'd be better as HR VP, not retail VP. SJ did a lot more than just hire good people, of course. Imagine me as a PhD chemist saying at an interview, "I'm not a very good chemist, but I hired really good research assistants to compensate for my lack of chemistry knowledge". Sounds ridiculous because it is.

Browett was known for cutting costs and customer experience to drive profit and Tim hired him any way. He then realized his mistake and fired him. He can't now fire Angela cause then he would look like a bozo.

Diversity is exactly what I said, hiring based on skin color or gender first and talent second. I noticed you didn't bother to give me your definition. 

I already gave you my definition of diversity.  Here's another:  "Diversity is any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. In a nutshell, it’s about empowering people by respecting and appreciating what makes them different, in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, education, and national origin."  https://globaldiversitypractice.com/what-is-diversity-inclusion/ ; But I get it, it's not something you care about, so you haven't tried to become informed about it.  Obviously you aren't a manager or executive, or you would have been well exposed to this by now.