Apple Board Modifies Tim Cook CEO Bonus Stock Award to Be More Performance Based

[Chupa Chupa]

Who cares whether Steve Jobs was involved in the new Mac Pro or not. His involvement (or lack there of) doesn't make it a good or bad product.

Apparently it does to people who keep saying Apple isn't innovating anymore. That seems to be the sine qua non in their mind to a productive Apple -- everything is mindlessly judged by them as Jobs era or Cook era. I merely point out that as far as actual project line up goes though it's still the Jobs era because products are not developed over night. Even Cook said Jobs left Apple with 4-6 years of new products. And for one to say the new MP is not novel, whether they like the concept or not is disingenuous.

So once cannot say Apple doesn't innovate anymore unless they mean Jobs lost his touch his last year... but he was lucid during his last keynote at WWDC '11, just months before he passed.

 

[Essenar]

Criticize them for building in China, they manufacture the new Mac Pro in the USA.

Then you complain about its looks, form factor and possible price.

Criticize them for being selfish and only caring about money, their CEO gambles guaranteed stock units that he ALREADY won/earned.

Then you complain about the lack of innovation.

What kind of innovation do you want? Floating computers with holographic alien chicks that you can hook up with? We're pretty much maxed out the innovations of these form factors. Laptops can't get any different. Rotating touch screens? We've tried that. They suck and no one bought them. Apple did NOT regret avoiding them.

Touch screen PC's? We've tried that. The HP TouchSmart was a joke and no one wanted it. It's too awkward to touch an LCD monitor that's at eye level with you. Your arm gets tired in like 20 minutes.

Next time you have an idea you think you want, make a FAKE version of it and use it for 20 minutes. If you get annoyed or strained, realize that you're not even using the REAL ONE and you're already annoyed.

The only products from Apple that I see that need change is that the Mac Pro doesn't look upgradeable (but I might be wrong about it) and the iPhone needs a bigger screen option. Those are the only two decisions left that make sense.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

The only products from Apple that I see that need change is that the Mac Pro doesn't look upgradeable (but I might be wrong about it)

Yes, per Larry Jordan, it should be completely configurable to the extent the previous MP was meant to be which is why Apple made a point to show how easy it is to open the case, and why they designed it that way on purpose:

http://www.larryjordan.biz/app_bin/wordpress/archives/2379

 

[zgh1999]

Tim Cook is such an unbelievably weak leader and CEO, that it boggles my mind.

Quite frankly, he simply does not cut it as a CEO for Apple, much less any other major tech company.

Where is the innovation and leadership? Where is the charisma? All I see him doing is blindly and slavishly defending the iPhone 5 screen size as if it is something set in stone.

Apple should focus on finding a replacement ASAP.

 

[Apple Corps]

I still don't see the problem with all the stock price drama. The stock is a bit down. Yes, A BIT. In 2012 it made a huge jump from 400 to 700. With no logical reason. So it came down from that again, all normal. It will grow again, I have no reason to doubt that. But probably at a pace that reflects Apple's growth and the market. Not some hype.

As a shareholder Tim hasn't been a disaster for me. The paid-out dividends are enough for a new Apple gadget every year for me.

Excuse me - you don't see a problem with a stock that has dropped from $700 to $400 over 9 months????

You think it should not have gone to $700 - well, do some analysis of the trading multiple and profit generation. Why so low a multiple? My belief is that the market has little faith in Apple due to a constipated pipeline and leader (and I use that term loosely).

 

[elev8d]

Tim Cook is such an unbelievably weak leader and CEO, that it boggles my mind.

Quite frankly, he simply does not cut it as a CEO for Apple, much less any other major tech company.

Where is the innovation and leadership? Where is the charisma? All I see him doing is blindly and slavishly defending the iPhone 5 screen size as if it is something set in stone.

Apple should focus on finding a replacement ASAP.

Charisma doesn't make someone a great leader. iPhone 5 screen size is set in stone as for additional screen sizes in future releases, we won't know until they come out. Apple has usually shrouded upcoming products in secrecy because they don't want people to hold out on buying their current generation of products for their next gen.

----------

Excuse me - you don't see a problem with a stock that has dropped from $700 to $400 over 9 months????

You think it should not have gone to $700 - well, do some analysis of the trading multiple and profit generation. Why so low a multiple? My belief is that the market has little faith in Apple due to a constipated pipeline and leader (and I use that term loosely).

I think his point was that the price was artificially inflated to $700 due to institutional trading, and it was not based purely on the pure market value of the company. Additionally, the stock reached $700 under the helm of Tim Cook, it was $240 when he was named CEO, and lower than that before he was named CEO. He was already instrumental in running the company well before Jobs officially named him as a successor, that transition was handled very well IMO.

 

[Apple Corps]

Charisma doesn't make someone a great leader. iPhone 5 screen size is set in stone as for additional screen sizes in future releases, we won't know until they come out. Apple has usually shrouded upcoming products in secrecy because they don't want people to hold out on buying their current generation of products for their next gen.

----------



I think his point was that the price was artificially inflated to $700 due to institutional trading, and it was not based purely on the pure market value of the company. Additionally, the stock reached $700 under the helm of Tim Cook, it was $240 when he was named CEO, and lower than that before he was named CEO. He was already instrumental in running the company well before Jobs officially named him as a successor, that transition was handled very well IMO.

The P/E multiple would not support the assertion that Apple was overpriced at $700. It is now at a paltry 9.0 - a joke. The stock growth, even after Cook took over, was propelled by Steve and his vision and the confidence the market had in Apple under his leadership. Cook's contributions (or lack thereof) are more apparent as each month passes. The issue is not if Cook is a Steve Jobs - he is not and never will be. The issue is his lack of performance in the #1 responsibility any CEO of a publicly traded company has - shareholder value.

 

[Mike Valmike]

Yes, per Larry Jordan, it should be completely configurable to the extent the previous MP was meant to be which is why Apple made a point to show how easy it is to open the case, and why they designed it that way on purpose:

http://www.larryjordan.biz/app_bin/wordpress/archives/2379

Nononono don't you see, the new Mac Pro doesn't have a huge box with room for cards and HDDs. Because if there's one thing that would have spelled innovation at Apple, it would have been built-in support for legacy hardware. And they should have added a joystick port, so I can use my old Gravis Flight Commander on it. Oh, and a Centronics port for my dot-matrix printer with the tab-hole paper too. And an 8-track tape player and CB radio.

 

[rainbowsofwhite]

Is more symbolic than anything else but it is clear that Apple is not the same company and that there is not actual innovation.

1. The Mac Pro... it is just hardware but the shape is not wow at all.
2. iOS7 new interface looks weak
3. The rest of the peripherals are just thinner.

So... yeap, a consumer company but not innovative and the CEO has to keep it that way.

I think there is some truth to your comment.

Unfortunately, without Steve at the helm, I'm also sensing the lack of innovation. I'm sure there's someone out there right now who has the next amazing big idea (that doesn't work for Apple).
So no, I don't think innovation is dead, regardless of the advanced technologies available.

Everyone seems to be "catching up" to Steve's ideas now and it's getting harder for consumers to choose which smart phone, laptop etc.

It's one thing to design and re-design the look, size or style of a product, but to truly invent a new product, well that was all Steve Jobs.

Steve was an inventor with a passion for design. (Not just a designer)

 

[jvmxtra]

[Bolded above for emphasis]

Yes, you can generalize and use anecdotal observation all day long. But doing so won't turn it to bona fide data to prove your point. (Most of my friends have blue cars therefore blue must be the most popular color for cars). The hasty generalization is itself a type of logical fallacy by definition. All you have done here is reword your original post, but its still just personal frustration and anecdotal observations -- no hard facts to buttress your points.

Let me know if you find some. I'm still interested.

You can continue to dream that apple is fine.
There is no question that people are questioning apple more than ever. Even MOssberg interview suggested as such to Cook.. (yes, you can continue to deny that these are just rumor).
When you wait for hard direct data to point out the problem that apple is having, that's when things are too late.

Perception my friend, becomes reality. And apple is heading towards that direction.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

You can continue to dream that apple is fine.
There is no question that people are questioning apple more than ever. Even MOssberg interview suggested as such to Cook.. (yes, you can continue to deny that these are just rumor).
When you wait for hard direct data to point out the problem that apple is having, that's when things are too late.

Perception my friend, becomes reality. And apple is heading towards that direction.

Don't put words in my mouth, my friend. Your original point was that Apple "lost money" by not making a larger iPhone, which I asked you to explain your theory with data. You still haven't proven that so now you want to divert attention by saying I said Apple is in great shape and inferring I'm a naive Pollyanna.

But since you want to go down that road... people are questioning Apple because Tim Cook doesn't have a presence like Steve Jobs did. Few people do. He's also made a lot of Freshman mistakes, which he's admitted too. He's getting the attention he deserves and yes, needs a couple good quarters or he'll be out sooner rather than later. Of course, your original post includes the Jobs era too.

However, if we are talking substance over style points Apple is still doing just fine compared to other computer and CE companies based on P&L ledgers. It's still leading the pack with consumers & I don't know where you find this negative perception toward Apple in consumers. It's THE most admired company in the world. Samsung is not even in the top 50. The iPhone 5, even not growing at the same rate as it's predecssors is still the #1 best selling iPhone of all time.

So your doom and gloom is a bit overwrought and very much unproven. Apple is leveling off from a tremendous growth period, yes. But there is no trend line to show consumers are tiring of the company. Your theory is correct only in your own head b/c you can't back it up with any data point whatsoever.

 

[Apple Corps]

So once cannot say Apple doesn't innovate anymore unless they mean Jobs lost his touch his last year... but he was lucid during his last keynote at WWDC '11, just months before he passed.

Chupa - think about Innovation being vision and execution. My belief is that Apple has fallen on hard times because Cook can not operationalize the products Steve envisioned. Not knowing what to do with the tough issues, he spins around with green data centers, apologies to China, puttering around the edge of his RSU plan, wasting Apple's cash on the absurd and failing to perform stock buyback plan (AAPL down another $10 today - soon will be under $400).

 

[bgillander]

Excuse me - you don't see a problem with a stock that has dropped from $700 to $400 over 9 months????

You think it should not have gone to $700 - well, do some analysis of the trading multiple and profit generation. Why so low a multiple? My belief is that the market has little faith in Apple due to a constipated pipeline and leader (and I use that term loosely).

Didn't it go from around $350 to around $650 in just three months the year before? Don't you see a problem with a stock that rises that quickly? Of course you don't, but you should research "tulip mania" or "market bubble". If a stock price goes up unreasonably fast, you should expect a correction. There was no magical "innovation" for those three months.

And if you really think that was a reasonable increase, you should thank Tim Cook, since it occurred while he was CEO.

 

[bluenix]

Didn't it go from around $350 to around $650 in just three months the year before? Don't you see a problem with a stock that rises that quickly? Of course you don't, but you should research "tulip mania" or "market bubble". If a stock price goes up unreasonably fast, you should expect a correction. There was no magical "innovation" for those three months.

And if you really think that was a reasonable increase, you should thank Tim Cook, since it occurred while he was CEO.

THANK YOU!
Maybe some of the people complaining about the stock price read and UNDERSTOOD that.

So far my perception of Tim Cook is that he does a good job at Apple. The latest iPhones were good releases, the desktop OS seems to be on a solid and good track, as does iOS. He made a bold move and released an iPad mini (something Steve Jobs seemed not to like) and the new iOS is getting more and more good reviews. So I would argue that he put the right people at the right position inside Apple. That's one of his most important tasks at running the company.

Does he have the charisma of Steve? No!
Is he a visionary like Steve? Maybe not, but we don't see that yet.
Does he run the company well? Looks like!

He failed with the release of the new iMacs. But it's not that Steve Jobs hadn't had its own mistakes. (Cube, MobileMe, Ping ...)

And as far as innovation goes. You can't expect one to innovate "the ass out of the market" every year. It took Steve Jobs 6 years to come from the iPod to the iPhone. I have confidence that the main drivers behind revolutionary products as well as really thought-out improvements to existing products and services are still working there and still on it!

I'd rather see them wait 2-3 years longer with, say, a TV. But then nail it!

What big innovations have we seen from other companies in that industry over the past 10 years? A Samsung Note? So called "smart TVs"? Chrome Books?

 

[Steve121178]

Tim Cook is such an unbelievably weak leader and CEO, that it boggles my mind.

Quite frankly, he simply does not cut it as a CEO for Apple, much less any other major tech company.

Where is the innovation and leadership? Where is the charisma? All I see him doing is blindly and slavishly defending the iPhone 5 screen size as if it is something set in stone.

Apple should focus on finding a replacement ASAP.

He's doing a good job in very tough economic times.

 

[Apple Corps]

Didn't it go from around $350 to around $650 in just three months the year before? Don't you see a problem with a stock that rises that quickly? Of course you don't, but you should research "tulip mania" or "market bubble". If a stock price goes up unreasonably fast, you should expect a correction. There was no magical "innovation" for those three months.

And if you really think that was a reasonable increase, you should thank Tim Cook, since it occurred while he was CEO.

You should research P/E multiple - Apple is trading at a huge discount due to the markets lack of confidence in Tim Cook.

----------

THANK YOU!
Maybe some of the people complaining about the stock price read and UNDERSTOOD that.

So far my perception of Tim Cook is that he does a good job at Apple. The latest iPhones were good releases, the desktop OS seems to be on a solid and good track, as does iOS. He made a bold move and released an iPad mini (something Steve Jobs seemed not to like) and the new iOS is getting more and more good reviews. So I would argue that he put the right people at the right position inside Apple. That's one of his most important tasks at running the company.

Does he have the charisma of Steve? No!
Is he a visionary like Steve? Maybe not, but we don't see that yet.
Does he run the company well? Looks like!

He failed with the release of the new iMacs. But it's not that Steve Jobs hadn't had its own mistakes. (Cube, MobileMe, Ping ...)

And as far as innovation goes. You can't expect one to innovate "the ass out of the market" every year. It took Steve Jobs 6 years to come from the iPod to the iPhone. I have confidence that the main drivers behind revolutionary products as well as really thought-out improvements to existing products and services are still working there and still on it!

I'd rather see them wait 2-3 years longer with, say, a TV. But then nail it!

What big innovations have we seen from other companies in that industry over the past 10 years? A Samsung Note? So called "smart TVs"? Chrome Books?

NO THANK YOU - look at the facts - P/E is a joke. Get past all the fluff commentary on innovation or whatever. From an investor's perspective Cook is a disaster. He needs to be gone.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Chupa - think about Innovation being vision and execution. My belief is that Apple has fallen on hard times because Cook can not operationalize the products Steve envisioned. Not knowing what to do with the tough issues, he spins around with green data centers, apologies to China, puttering around the edge of his RSU plan, wasting Apple's cash on the absurd and failing to perform stock buyback plan (AAPL down another $10 today - soon will be under $400).

Mostly true and undeniable. (I think "hard times" is a bit much. Stumble is more accurate. The CE world is still very envious of Apple.) But I wouldn't argue with the bulk of your statement at all, however, it wasn't the point of the person I was initially responding too. His point was that Apple will fail because it isn't making larger iPhones, and using personal anecdote and frustration as his sole offer of proof.

Tim Cook's execution failures are a separate issue, though I do take some comfort that he did a mea culpa on the iMac debacle. At least he realized he has made bad decisions. If he uses it as a teachable moment (even Jobs made bad decisions throughout his career and learned from them, great leaders do that) then this will all be a blip and once again many MR posters will look like know-nothings in retrospect as we read the archives in a few years. If not, he'll be gone by 2014.

 

[Apple Corps]

He's doing a good job in very tough economic times.

He is doing a very poor job - take a look at what the Dow has done this past year - look at Google - even Yahoo for goodness sake.

 

[Apple Corps]

Chupa - I agree with you 100% on the bigger iPhone screen issue and the rest of your commentary. If Art is doing his job as Board Chair AAPL will have improved greatly or Cook will be gone - 2014 will be a pivotal year. This stock performance going on beyond 2014 would demonstrate a complete failure of corporate governance.

 

[Steve121178]

He is doing a very poor job - take a look at what the Dow has done this past year - look at Google - even Yahoo for goodness sake.

Once the target market has bought an iPhone, iPad & maybe a Mac it's very hard to keep selling the same thing to the same people every 12 months.

Google makes most of its revenue through advertising, it's a license to print money for the areas in which Google dominates, namely search.

Google are branching out to offer other services but this makes a pittance compared to ads.

 

[bluenix]

You should research P/E multiple - Apple is trading at a huge discount due to the markets lack of confidence in Tim Cook.

----------



NO THANK YOU - look at the facts - P/E is a joke. Get past all the fluff commentary on innovation or whatever. From an investor's perspective Cook is a disaster. He needs to be gone.

P/E looks fine. And from an investor's point of view a reasonable P/E is way better than a bubble like Amazon.

Steve was known for "not giving a xxx" about the stock price. By the end of 2007 (the year we got the iPhone) Apple shares were at $200. At the end of 2008 it was down to $100. Only to bounce back to 200 by the end of 2009. So over the course of 2 years there was almost no gain. Even though Apple was right in the middle of gaining all the smartphone profits out there and on its way to dominate the market.

That is the irrationality of the stock market. And according to your logic, Steve should have been fired back then.

If the price for Apple stocks skyrocks to 700 from 360 within some months then this is a bubble. And those are easily to burst at the slightest hint of bad news.

I am an investor and I have my faith in Tim Cook. I get a really nice dividend now and and know that the current CEO of Apple actually cares a bit about his shareholders (something Steve NEVER did).

 

[Steve121178]

Steve was known for "not giving a xxx" about the stock price.

Nonsense. As the CEO it was his job and responsibility to the shareholders & investors to care.

 

[phoenixsan]

Seems to me....

a sensible measure. Everybody in a company must be awarded based in performance. Let the stock options be more free as a bargaining tool, as in the case of Bob Mansfield....

 

[bluenix]

Nonsense. As the CEO it was his job and responsibility to the shareholders & investors to care.

And he did so by paying dividends? By informing shareholders about his health? Or by never really answering to shareholders' questions? Or by saying "The press and the stock price will take care of themselves"?

In a way he was right. Concentrate on making good products that people will buy and the stock price will be fine. If the stock market creates a bubble and bursts, well, then that is "their" problem.

 

[Apple Corps]

P/E looks fine. And from an investor's point of view a reasonable P/E is way better than a bubble like Amazon.

Steve was known for "not giving a xxx" about the stock price. By the end of 2007 (the year we got the iPhone) Apple shares were at $200. At the end of 2008 it was down to $100. Only to bounce back to 200 by the end of 2009. So over the course of 2 years there was almost no gain. Even though Apple was right in the middle of gaining all the smartphone profits out there and on its way to dominate the market.

That is the irrationality of the stock market. And according to your logic, Steve should have been fired back then.

If the price for Apple stocks skyrocks to 700 from 360 within some months then this is a bubble. And those are easily to burst at the slightest hint of bad news.

I am an investor and I have my faith in Tim Cook. I get a really nice dividend now and and know that the current CEO of Apple actually cares a bit about his shareholders (something Steve NEVER did).

You say you are an investor and are touting the nice dividend (3%) touting Tim "caring" while the underlying stock value has cratered under his time - utterly laughable.