Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook Angrily Rejects Political Proposal Asking for Profits-First Policies
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I've never really paid attention to Tim Cook, only checked in to make sure he didn't screw something up.
But today, well, wow.
Good job man!
But today, well, wow.
Good job man!
Human behavior induced (i.e.: factories, cars, too many cows due to human consumption so more cows farting, etc) climate change is complete and utter BS, so I applaud the NCPPR.
We need more liberal tree huggers slapped around when it comes to this junk science.
We need more liberal tree huggers slapped around when it comes to this junk science.
Last edited:
Great response from Cook, bravo
But this will have a VERY interesting fallout because Apple is constantly championed by conservatives like rush Limbaugh who are always Apple's bandwagon on everything always twist it into something anti Obama
But this will have a VERY interesting fallout because Apple is constantly championed by conservatives like rush Limbaugh who are always Apple's bandwagon on everything always twist it into something anti Obama
Think of what you will of climate change, you seriously can't think profits first, screw everything else to be a good policy......
Look at what happened to GM when all they cared about is profits, ROI's, etc.
Even tho 97% of Scientists agree with human behavior induced climate change. You can't get 97% of scientists to agree on anything.
Even if you agree that climate change isn't an issue. Apple should be trying to protect the environment as much as they can. I don't expect anyone from the STUPID party to agree with Science and Math.
What a business does and how they do it affects how consumers feel about them. If Apple pursued profits only, they never would've made an iPhone or an iPad or any of the other various innovations they've made over the last 30 years.
I believe Tim is just cowtowing to his customers because Apple makes alot more profit per item/products then any other companies in the world. I think Google would be more fit for this moto then Apple.
Apple, and its current CEO in particular, has values beyond the pursuit of profit.
I like it.
But let's not be surprised when companies whose ONLY motivation is profit, can easily leapfrog Apple in future sales, market share, revenue, growth, etc. (i.e. Samsung as well as the other Asian companies like HTC, Huawei and Lenovo, it's not in their culture or mindset to give a crap about things like the environment).
I like it.
But let's not be surprised when companies whose ONLY motivation is profit, can easily leapfrog Apple in future sales, market share, revenue, growth, etc. (i.e. Samsung as well as the other Asian companies like HTC, Huawei and Lenovo, it's not in their culture or mindset to give a crap about things like the environment).
Good for Tim Cook. At the end of the day, there is no doubt that the company has to look out for its sustained profitability. However, there is a difference between that and maximizing profit above all else. When you are comfortably profitable, have something like $150 billion in cash, you can certainly afford to not be bore sighted on ROI. In fact, there is probably something wrong with you if you aren't a little altruistic then.
This idea that you have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder value has been positive for Wall Street, but for the vast majority of Americans (and workers everywhere) it hasn't played out so well. Just take a look at recent changes at one tech company's (I won't call them out by name) healthcare and retirement program that was attributed to just this sort of attitude. There is such a thing as corporate responsibility and it is nice to see that Apple still has it.
This idea that you have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder value has been positive for Wall Street, but for the vast majority of Americans (and workers everywhere) it hasn't played out so well. Just take a look at recent changes at one tech company's (I won't call them out by name) healthcare and retirement program that was attributed to just this sort of attitude. There is such a thing as corporate responsibility and it is nice to see that Apple still has it.
Did he really say "bloody"? He's been hanging around Ive too much.
I like that Apple is being more environmentally friendly, on their own terms. If this think-tank doesn't like it, they can sell their stock or attempt to convince fellow shareholders to side with them.
I like that Apple is being more environmentally friendly, on their own terms. If this think-tank doesn't like it, they can sell their stock or attempt to convince fellow shareholders to side with them.
Conservative tears are the sweetest
Sweeter than crocodile tears?! I'm skeptical about that.
Wait until you read the new policy regarding out of warranty devices. Macrumors need more time to make it appear that the change is positive.
That's good to read. Especially when another story today is "Apple to Charge Fees for Out-of-Warranty Chat Support". This trumps that, for me.
What does cowtowing mean?
If Apple cares about profits, they would've approved this proposal and wouldn't resist so much on the dividends over the past few years.
They didn't have to make this a big deal. They didn't have go 100% renewable and so on.
Talking is nothing, actually doing it is what defines Apple.
I'm sorry. WHAT? They make these things to make profits. These products were pursued because they are highly profitable. Don't act like Apple made the iPhone and didn't expect it to be a gold mine. If it weren't for the iPhone and iPad, Apple probably wouldn't exist anymore.
It's down a whole 35 cents a share in aftermarket trading.
And it's a pleasure to say for once: Steve WOULD have done this.
No Apple doesnt care about profilts then maybe get rid of that 160B mound of dust in the basement.
- Status