Why is Tim Cook special?

His operational experience and results is/are second to none. He is able to predict sales trends (5c withstanding, no one is perfect), make agreements with suppliers (usually get lower prices than anyone else and custom chips), and deliver results. If sales drop because there isn't enough product to meet demand it's usually because the suppliers and manufacturers couldn't meet expectations not because Apple didn't predict what they needed to meet actual sales. It's a lot more complicated than that (he continually exceeds margins) but that's why he's so "special."

I feel SJ was great, but in his day when Apple innovated the iPhone and iPad. However, and with respect, I feel that if he was with us now he would hold back progress by clinging to his decisions to decide what is best for us. They were then as we had no modern day smartphone or tablet. Now these devices have matured, we want more, and Android gives that, iOS and iphone doesn't. Hamstrung, by probably a need not to push forward too soon after SJ's passing. The board has spoken that they want innovation, I feel that coming, and we will finally get an iPhone with a proper screen this year. New things not just the same ol incremental changes. So, I feel TC is the man for the job. New era now, as these devices are not now new and innovative that SJ gave us, they are mature, time to drive forward now

eternlgladiator said:

I'm sorry but you haven't really given any reason why Tim is better than any other well rounded exec. I strongly doubt that as CEO, he's responsible for forecasting anything and predicting sales trends. Also, saying he is making agreements with suppliers is probably true but again it's something any other person could do at the helm of Apple. I'm asking what Tim brings to the table that is so unique nobody else could do.

Figuratively speaking, you could make me the CEO of apple and if I walk into a supplier meeting and tell them what I want they're going to listen. It's about the presence Apple has a gigantic company.

Click to expand...

I gave you qualitative reasons but you apparently want quantitative data (could be clearer next time). I think you overestimate the worth of many top CEO's these days while also thinking it's quite easy, anyone can do it. Even though Apple has a strong presence don't think for a minute that anyone could negotiate operational deals like Cook can. He continually exceeds shareholder expectations and brings in the lowest prices for chips, etc. Samsung has some smart CEO's but even they can't match Cook's operational record and they fab chips!

Here's an AI article on his genius and why he's better than any one else.

eternlgladiator said:

Also, saying he is making agreements with suppliers is probably true but again it's something any other person could do at the helm of Apple. I'm asking what Tim brings to the table that is so unique nobody else could do.

Figuratively speaking, you could make me the CEO of apple and if I walk into a supplier meeting and tell them what I want they're going to listen. It's about the presence Apple has a gigantic company.

Click to expand...

Lol okay suppliers don't bend over backwards for Apple, and definitely didn't even earlier when Cook was COO. It's not a matter of going to a supplier and saying "give me x amount of this", you need to negotiate rates, contract lengths, partnerships, possible joint ventures (Apple supplies some of it's suppliers with manufacturing equipment) etc.

If you think you can do it, maybe you think you're too special Cook has been praised as an exceptional supply chain manager, if anyone could do it then he wouldn't be paid so much.

eternlgladiator said:

Figuratively speaking, you could make me the CEO of apple and if I walk into a supplier meeting and tell them what I want they're going to listen. It's about the presence Apple has a gigantic company.

Click to expand...

what you want >< what tim cook wants

the people representing the suppliers in these meetings would wipe the floor with you

I think he's a good manager of people and resources. I have my doubts whether he has the fire, and drive to lead Apple.

We see other companies swinging for the fences with their products the past few years trying to catch up to apple. Some of those releases really didn't pay off, but they're trying.

Apple under Cooks has done very little innovating. Just tweaking there existing products (the nMP is the exception)

Cook talks about how innovation is in the very fabric of apple, yet they spend the least amount on R&D. MS spends 10 billion, Google 5.8 billion in 2013 and 10 in 2012, Samsung 10 billion (true Samsung has many non computer products) Apple on the other hand spent 4.5 billion. Its tough to keep up with innovation when your competitors are out spending you 2 to 1.

Source on my numbers cNet

maflynn said:

I think he's a good manager of people and resources. I have my doubts whether he has the fire, and drive to lead Apple.

We see other companies swinging for the fences with their products the past few years trying to catch up to apple. Some of those releases really didn't pay off, but they're trying.

Apple under Cooks has done very little innovating. Just tweaking there existing products (the nMP is the exception)

Cook talks about how innovation is in the very fabric of apple, yet they spend the least amount on R&D. MS spends 10 billion, Google 5.8 billion in 2013 and 10 in 2012, Samsung 10 billion (true Samsung has many non computer products) Apple on the other hand spent 4.5 billion. Its tough to keep up with innovation when your competitors are out spending you 2 to 1.

Source on my numbers cNet

Click to expand...

A few things I have to say about this. Those other companies are spending tons of money on R&D, yes, but they're losing a lot of that money producing these products that "didn't really pay off." Also, it's not just about money, it's about people. These other companies may need to spend so much more than Apple because they don't have the quality of people that are employed at Apple.

Also, with regards to Tim being less innovative than Steve was. Well, of course, Steve was an idea man. But not all of Apple's products were solely his idea. Also, he knew what kind of man Tim was (a numbers man), and still decided he was the right guy to run the ship.

Three years passed between the introduction of the iPhone and the introduction of the iPad. It's just over three years now since the iPad was released. So if you're going by years between releases in major new product categories, the Tim Cook era is hardly far behind the Steve Jobs reign. And also, look, Samsung's smart watch was a giant failure. Apple won't release a product in a new category until they know they've done it right and have created a product that will be useful to the public and in high demand.