You're entitled to that belief, but no one else believes you can, which is why you're not on the list of candidates.
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.
Apple Awards Executives 1,000,000 Shares of Stock to Stay Until 2016
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're entitled to that belief, but no one else believes you can, which is why you're not on the list of candidates.
In theory, yes. In practice, no. Kind of like the socialist "to each according to their deserts."
The system is sort of screwed up.
You are correct... I know nothing of your background, experience or abilities. I can only base any possible assessment on your posts here. I reiterate my lemonade stand statement.
Yes. Talent is everywhere and people can be replaced. Based upon the demonstrated performance of Apple over the past few years, I'm hard pressed to understand your silly ravings.
Last edited:
I sold my Apple shares too. But you don't get to that level of success without making efficient decisions about capital investment. You might have noticed the economy is still not great -- holding cash might be the best option. If you don't like it, then that's a good reason not to buy Apple stock.
Im not questioning the decisions they have made. Im questioning whether or not they can make 80bn worth of same-sound choices. If not, they have no business keeping it from the share holders.
use what you need, save what you need, pay out the rest. dont hoard cash for the sake of it. simple.
----------
None of us have the business knowledge to run a lemonade stand. If we did, we'd be out running our lemonade stands rather than wasting our time jacking off on this forum.
What if we find it more rewarding to waste our time on this board than to make money out of selling lemonade
From my experience in the business world, in general top execs don't run the show for a company, or at least are not the brains and talent behind the company. And now that Jobs is gone (the brains and talent behind Apple's success), perhaps the execs should be replaced to prevent mediocrity. It's absurd to pay them big bucks for what Jobs created.
It's not summer here (Manhattan) anyway.
sure as hell not in northern sweden either. winter is fast approaching.
Hey walk the walk then. Go out and get a high level exec job at a Forbes or Fortune 100 company then. Easy talk from the peanut gallery. I bet you could hit a Josh Beckett fastball too.
No one puts these guys on a pedestal. Their record speaks for itself. No one may be irreplaceable but some are harder to replace than others plus these guys have worked together for a while and if Apple needs anything now it's consistency & familiarity as it figures out the post-Jobs era.
Right and Jobs authorized a grant for Tim that is about the same amount as the above. These people were the best Jobs could find and no they are not easily replaceable.
You just don't seem to be able to form any kind of logical, cohesive argument.
First you state that, in your vast experience, the top executives are not the brains and talent behind the company. Then you say perhaps the executives should be replaced to prevent mediocrity. That one is a real "head scratcher".
As has been reiterated ad infinitum within this thread already, the executive compensation plans rest with Apple management. If your experience in the business world is so spectacular as to be capable of determining from afar how Apple should implement their compensation packages, you should hustle your butt out to Cupertino because I'm sure they'll want to give you a big bucks consulting contract.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of business experience do you have? Ever been a senior executive in a Fortune 100 firm? Fortune 500? Ever been any level executive in any public corporation? Ever run a lemonade stand?
Exactly, I never said it was illegal, Jobs just took the 1 dollar salary in order to avoid paying income tax, Social security, medicare, etc and was taxed at a much lesser rate on what he earned.
Exactly, that was what i was saying and it's exactly why Jobs took his 1 dollar salary. Of course those who worship at the alter of Steve refuse to see that.
Why would that change anyone's opinion either way? It's perfectly legal. Isn't that how Warren Buffet pays 15% in federal taxes every year? Capital gains are taxed at a different rate than income. Makes perfect sense to organize compensation to take advantage of the current tax code.
If Steve and Apple were "evil" for minimizing Steve's taxable income profile, then every accounting firm and bookkeeper in the United States is thoroughly evil. That's pretty much all they do: help their clients fully comply with federal, state, and local tax law while minimizing their tax liabilities as much as possible.
If that is objectionable, perhaps a simpler flat tax would be better?
Wow great for them! keep up the great work! and come out with new MBP's already!! and maybe a 15" MBA?
Apple's cash reserves are estimated to reach $94 billion by the end of this year. That money has not been invested in equipment, inventory, talent or intellectual property. It's just a vast pile of money sitting in a heap.
The typical reason that tech companies suspend dividends is to reinvest capital in the business to help it grow faster. Apple isn't doing that.
And if you think these decisions are being made by idiots who don't know about this stuff called money, then you shouldn't buy the stock.
Something about a Mac being used for the whole "Occupy Wall Street Movement" is funny after reading this thread... Maybe they should be out finding some small computer maker on the verge of bankruptcy and buy that one instead.
Why would that change anyone's opinion either way? It's perfectly legal. Isn't that how Warren Buffet pays 15% in federal taxes every year? Capital gains are taxed at a different rate than income. Makes perfect sense to organize compensation to take advantage of the current tax code.
If Steve and Apple were "evil" for minimizing Steve's taxable income profile, then every accounting firm and bookkeeper in the United States is thoroughly evil. That's pretty much all they do: help their clients fully comply with federal, state, and local tax law while minimizing their tax liabilities as much as possible.
If that is objectionable, perhaps a simpler flat tax would be better?
Theres a difference between calling Steve evil because he opted for a minimum tax route, and calling him out as a non-saint for having a $1 wage.
It is not unusual for a CEO with extensive assets to take a $1 annual salary, as in:
Vikram Pandit
Eric Schmidt
Larry Page
Sergey Brin
Jerry Yang
Larry Ellison
Meg Whitman
Mark Zuckerberg
Jeff Katzenberg
John Chambers
etc.
Edit: Sorry, not all CEO's, but you get the point.
I think what you are seeing is a change in leadership style. Tim Cook clearly has a different approach on running a company. Who knows how Steve 'rewarded' his teams, but Tim does things like giving the company extra time off, and yes....big bonuses for who he clearly believes are the core leaders at Apple so that they have some tangible recognition for their work.
I find it interesting that many posts suggest these Execs don't work hard. I'm sure they work ridiculous hours, and love Apple just as much as the next employee.
I believe Apple is investing in their key resources.
The main reason he's not an Apple executive is that no one on the Apple Board knows him.
----------
Well, not literally.
Correct. And if he had done something noteworthy at some other organization, I'm sure recruiters would have brought him to their attention.