Tim Cook Faced an 'Insurrection' Following Announcement of Bob Mansfield's Retirement

[bretm]

Originally Posted by IJ Reilly

Whenever someone says, "it's not about the money," it's about the money.

Life 101, folks.

In Mansfield's case it was about the money. In the case of the people who worked for him, it was about the conditions. I'm sure they're well paid. I'm sure they can afford pretty much all they want and need. They're not going to get a big enough increase to make it worth a crappy work environment when they could easily go somewhere else. Especially with their creds.

So often with employees it IS about letting them feel they have a voice and empowering them. They want respect and to feel proud. They don't like to feel that someone got a job they didn't deserve. It undermines why they feel they're working so hard.

Mansfield didn't need the money. He didn't need the job. He was probably tired. They had to make him an offer so ridiculous he couldn't refuse.

[citi]

Originally Posted by IJ Reilly

Whenever someone says, "it's not about the money," it's about the money.

Life 101, folks.

For Bob, yes, it's about the money. For Apple, it's about the potential loss of talent.

[bretm]

Originally Posted by tdream

If it wasn't about money then why did he come back?

We're talking about the hardware guys. Not Mansfield. it wasn't about money with them, it was about not putting somebody in as their superior they didn't respect.

[tdream]

Originally Posted by bretm

We're talking about the hardware guys. Not Mansfield. it wasn't about money with them, it was about not putting somebody in as their superior they didn't respect.

The hardware decisions or the quality of the man doing the job wasn't good enough, Tim Cook decides we need the old guy back. But if his decision was already made to retire, I'm sure Mansfield has a tonne of money already since he was working with Apple for so long as a senior executive. Why come back? I think you guys are looking past the simple truth and platitudes, no one comes back just to kick it with the guys again. It's about the money.

[GenesisST]

Originally Posted by Tiger8

Why? All smart companies do that for their most valuable employees; they can't stop anyone from quitting or retiring, but what they can do is keep them as advisors or consultants onboard.

As a company, it's normal to try to keep talent.

But I question his colleagues and employees... If the guys want to retire, let him. Just mount an "insurrection", after his replacement actually had time to suck

[ronwasserman]

Originally Posted by MH01

2 million a month.....WOW!

Nearly 1 1/2 minutes income to Apple. Drop in their bucket.

[MacFather]

Dear Bob,

Bring new iMac/Mac Mini/Mac Pro as soon as possible.

Sincerely, Everyone

[samcraig]

They offered him an iPhone 5 but he wanted the money instead.

Incidentally - sure 2 mill a month is exorbitant. And stockholders should take note about how and WHERE money is being spent. It can say a lot about the health and future direction.

Bob won't stay forever. Any insurrection has only been delayed.

On the flip side - I am sure with all the crap that Bob had to endure emotionally from Steve for years and years - that this retention bonus barely scratches the surface on what he is owed...

[citi]

Originally Posted by tdream

The hardware decisions or the quality of the man doing the job wasn't good enough, Tim Cook decides we need the old guy back. But if his decision was already made to retire, I'm sure Mansfield has a tonne of money already since he was working with Apple for so long as a senior executive. Why come back? I think you guys are looking past the simple truth and platitudes, no one comes back just to kick it with the guys again. It's about the money.

Maybe it's a little early in the morning?

We are not disputing why Bob came back, we are explaining the reasoning for Apple paying him the huge consulting salary to come back. If they, , didn't feel like they needed him there, right now, they would have let him retire. It's a temporary solution for a bigger problem.

[Tiger8]

Originally Posted by GenesisST

As a company, it's normal to try to keep talent.

But I question his colleagues and employees... If the guys want to retire, let him. Just mount an "insurrection", after his replacement actually had time to suck

I guess none of us know the circumstances, but perhaps Mr Cook wanted to be proactive and didn't want to wait around for things to 'really suck' before bringing him back?

The longer people are gone, the harder it is to bring them back.

[tdream]

Originally Posted by citi

Maybe it's a little early in the morning?

We are not disputing why Bob came back, we are explaining the reasoning for Apple paying him the huge consulting salary to come back. If they, , didn't feel like they needed him there, right now, they would have let him retire. It's a temporary solution for a bigger problem.

No it's regarding someone debating 'it's not about the money' when it is. Very simples.

On a side note, more mismanagement from the people in senior positions at Apple. And as someone in a previous thread noted. Apple are making large withdrawals in people's goodwill toward the company. It's not reflected in sales but then when you have such large capital of goodwill it rarely does. Take Diablo 3 sales for example, they made record sales on the basis of D2 being such a quality game. On a larger scale the game has had many problems and the focus on monetary features such as the RMA and battle vs piracy (always online) meant that gameplay suffered.

Apple is riding the goodwill crest built up by impeccable marketing campaigns over the past decade. The goodwill built up by Steve Jobs over the past decade still has enormous impact on Apple customers, but I believe it will wane. I don't believe Tim Cook is a visionary. I do believe iPhone 5 is part of the Jobs masterplan for the next 5 years but the execution definitely leaves something to be desired. Apple is now where I'd say the mortgage crisis was in 2004, maybe even 2003, on the crest of a wave. Unfortunately for Tim Cook I don't think he is the one to begin a new crest when this one falls.

[b166er]

It's amazing how technology is influenced by which companies these people choose to work for. I think about all the geniuses who have a lot to offer the tech world who are flipping burgers and it makes me sad. $2 million a month... I couldn't spend that no matter how hard I tried.

[Battlefield Fan]

Originally Posted by Tiger8

I hope I become 'Shrek' one day and be worth 2 million dollars a month, when I'm about to retire...

That's a Shrek with not 2 million total but 2 million a month.... Every month

[urbanslaughter]

Originally Posted by citi

This isn't about money, it's about keeping all of your talent happy. If it really was that bad, you do whatever you have to, to keep your talent in house. The last thing you want is 3 or 4 senior HARDWARE guys going to google/samsung/Nokia.

Business 101 folks

I'm not going to argue that it's not important to keep your talent happy. Keeping talent is probably the biggest factor in making the transition from good to best, however, there are much easier ways to prevent talent from going to google/samsung/Nokia. Non-compete clauses do actually work - and it's even easier when most of the competition is located in a specific area like Silicon Valley. I guess that's Business 201 though.

[Leonard1818]

If they can afford to pay that much money to the head "hardware engineer" I have no qualms returning my piece of hardware as many friggin times as it takes to get one that satisfies me.

I encourage everyone else to do the same.

(for what it's worth, I've only sent my iPhone 5 back once).

[citi]

Originally Posted by tdream

No it's regarding someone debating 'it's not about the money' when it is. Very simples.

On a side note, more mismanagement from the people in senior positions at Apple. And as someone in a previous thread noted. Apple are making large withdrawals in people's goodwill toward the company. It's not reflected in sales but then when you have such large capital of goodwill it rarely does. Take Diablo 3 sales for example, they made record sales on the basis of D2 being such a quality game. On a larger scale the game has had many problems and the focus on monetary features such as the RMA and battle vs piracy (always online) meant that gameplay suffered.

Apple is riding the goodwill crest built up by impeccable marketing campaigns over the past decade. The goodwill built up by Steve Jobs over the past decade still has enormous impact on Apple customers, but I believe it will wane. I don't believe Tim Cook is a visionary. I do believe iPhone 5 is part of the Jobs masterplan for the next 5 years but the execution definitely leaves something to be desired. Apple is now where I'd say the mortgage crisis was in 2004, maybe even 2003, on the crest of a wave. Unfortunately for Tim Cook I don't think he is the one to begin a new crest when this one falls.

Someone would be me. I said it, and you are sound biting. If you aren't going to acknowledge the entire statement then you will continue to argue a point that really isn't the at the heart of the conversation. Again, the money statement is in reference to Apple, not Mansfield, which I have said several times that he did it for the money.

Oh, and on a side note: I can't believe you are comparing a video game to a multi-Billion dollar entity

[urbanslaughter]

People keep acting like it's no big deal to pay a senior executive $24 million/year. Take a look at what CEO's make. $24 million is a TON of money, even for a CEO. Sure there are a few who blow that number out of the water, but it drops off pretty quickly after the top-paid ones. Don't forget that he's getting stock options ON TOP of that. it's truly and OBSCENE amount of money.

I just checked. $24 Million is more than all but the 48 highest paid CEO's in the World. Remember, this guy is not a CEO, but a senior VP.

[BoxerGT2.5]

Can he do software? Cause clearly Forstall can't.

[Kwill]

2 million dollars a month? That explains the new statue.

[mingoglia]

Can we assume that the VAST majority of people on the MacRumors forums are big supporters of capitalism and the American way? Sounds like it, which makes me happy. Seems to me like most Mac owners I meet face to face tend to not be that way. Or is capitalism only good when it comes to Apple and keeping Apple executives happy in order to keep customers happy (Macrumors users), and stock holders happy (again, macrumors users)? Just curious if there's any double standard at play here. Just hear a lot of how great Apple as a company is, and how great apple execs are... and very little about how they're taking those record profits, paying their fair share (I believe apple paid single digit federal tax rates last year), and creating as many jobs as possible with those record profits.

[Sportcat]

Originally Posted by EvilEvil

Anyone else think Bob looks like Chris Farley?

Two million a month buys a nice van down by the river!

[citi]

Originally Posted by urbanslaughter

I'm not going to argue that it's not important to keep your talent happy. Keeping talent is probably the biggest factor in making the transition from good to best, however, there are much easier ways to prevent talent from going to google/samsung/Nokia. Non-compete clauses do actually work - and it's even easier when most of the competition is located in a specific area like Silicon Valley. I guess that's Business 201 though.

You must not be up on your Business 201 education. Non-competes are illegal in California.

[JAT]

Originally Posted by IJ Reilly

Whenever someone says, "it's not about the money," it's about the money.

Life 101, folks.

Only if it is the person of interest saying it. Unless you are claiming someone in this thread is Mansfield or Cook.

[urbanslaughter]

Originally Posted by citi

You must not be up on your Business 201 education. Non-competes are illegal in California.

That's true only if you're not an equity stakeholder. I presumed he was one. I could be wrong about that though.
(the eyeroll was for your preachiness - which we could all do without).

[jessica.]

Originally Posted by iBreatheApple

Sucks that people's personal lives and decisions get exploited like this. It's nobody's business.

This is public info when you're dealing with top level executives champ. Maybe understand business a bit before you start crying about what is "nobody's business."

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...24958/d10k.htm