Since Tim has taken over responsibility at Apple (early 2011, stock price around 340) it has grown to 400. That's about in line with NASDAQ-100 and I wouldn't call that "cratered".
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 Board Modifies Tim Cook CEO Bonus Stock Award to Be More Performance Based
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Since Tim has taken over responsibility at Apple (early 2011, stock price around 340) it has grown to 400. That's about in line with NASDAQ-100 and I wouldn't call that "cratered".
On the momentum of what Steve had in place Apple rose to $700. Tim Cook rode that wave and now Wall Street is seeing what he can do now that he is further out of Steve's momentum. And it is NOT GOOD.
You have got to be kidding me.
I am an AAPL shareholder too -- but the disastrous performance of Tim Cook as an CEO has really taken its toll on my portfolio.
How many shares of AAPL do you hold?
AAPL should not be a dividend stock -- it is a bad sign -- dividends signal to the market that AAPL is no longer a growth company that relies on innovation.
Even as a dividend stock, AAPL pays little compared to other bluechips.
Get a clue already.
Tim Cook just does not cut it as a CEO.
He may be a good COO, but a CEO he is not.
I own about 100, bought them back in 2004. I agree with you about the "dividend stock". But that's the fact. Apple is operating in markets where there simply isn't room for +100% growth a year or even more. Apples stock rose over the last 10 years because they opened up new markets with yearly growth way beyond 100%.
If you don't grow sales (and profits) of that amount or provide an outlook that it will rise that much, your stock shouldn't rise with 50% or more a year. That would be called a bubble. And that's exactly what happend with AAPL when it jumped from 400 to 700 last year. What we have seen under Tim Cook was a little bubble that got corrected.
You own only 100 shares of AAPL and you want to talk about Tim Cook being an acceptable CEO?
Come on.
Why not put your money where your mouth is and put in more money on AAPL if you really have that much faith in Tim Cook's ability?
I have much more than you invested in AAPL, and am currently looking for an acceptable exit point.
But at its current depressed price, it is extremely difficult for me to exit. And I am telling ya -- my portfolio is hurting badly.
For a company like Apple, Tim Cook just does not cut it. I don't care what warped perspective you are arguing from -- it ain't even close to being within the range of different arguments that could be accepted as being reasonable.
At its current P/E, AAPL is resembling more like Dell than even Microsoft. Stop digging your head in the sand and get it out of your ass for a change and look at the picture as it is -- and you will see what I, along with other AAPL shareholders and supporters are saying.
Where is Tim Cook's vision? Where is the charisma? Where is the decisive leadership?
All I can see him doing is blindly and dogmatically defending iPhone 5's screen size. Why even bother spending so much of his public air time defending the iPhone's screen size? If he wises up and bothers to look around, he will realize that the vast majority of consumers across Europe and Asia have already shifted to smartphones with bigger screen sizes than the iPhone. The iPhone 5 may have a loyal customer base in America, but that is steadily eroding.
Don't get me wrong, I am not obsessive about the iPhone's screen size -- I actually think it is a red-herring -- but Tim Cook's compulsion in blindly defending it is revealing as to his leadership qualities (or the lack thereof). Ultimately, there is no right or wrong screen sizes -- it all comes down to giving the consumers the choice of the correct screen sizes for themselves -- but Tim Cook for whatever reason is refusing to budge on the issue.
Rather than appearing stubborn and obsessive about a silly screen size issue, Apple should be focused on innovating to the max and reinventing existing technologies and coming up with new product categories that actually would change the way we do things for the better. And sadly, I just don't this happening under Tim Cook.
And Apple should stop churning out those silly ads on TV that keep saying it is innovating -- there is a very big difference between simply saying you are innovating, than the actual act of innovating. Putting up nice looking ads on TV claiming that you are focused on innovating does not actually mean that you are indeed innovating. These ads just appear silly and tiring. I would rather Apple be a doer rather than a sayer. If Apple really believes that it is focused on innovating, let's see the innovative products. Putting up ads saying that Apple is innovating simply just does not cut it -- it is just a bunch of empty words if there is nothing to show.
The truth is that AAPL is now severely discounted by the market -- even with its massive cash hoard and sticky customer base -- due to Tim Cook's subpar leadership.
Sadly, Apple under Tim Cook is falling way, way short of the Apple we once knew and admire -- all I can see so far is him blindly defending products that were introduced by Jobs and being content with trying to preserve the turf -- and even for that defensive posture, he is failing very badly.
To say that it is "leadership" is actually being overly kind -- because his role is nowhere near that.
I can see him being a decent COO, but CEO he surely he is not.
The sooner the major shareholders look for a suitable and qualified replacement, the better.
Last edited:
Wow... when you put it THAT way, I feel bad for you.
I hope the share prices go up so you can sell and exit.
Be Happy - Don't Worry
The Dow closed up 150 points today and Apple is down another 4.62 - under $400 per share now - way to go Tim.
But on a more strategic note, Tim Cook has architected a public statement on Supreme Court decisions.
That is in lieu of knowing how to get the stock price cratering turned around.
Operation distraction - get their eye off the ball.
The Dow closed up 150 points today and Apple is down another 4.62 - under $400 per share now - way to go Tim.
But on a more strategic note, Tim Cook has architected a public statement on Supreme Court decisions.
That is in lieu of knowing how to get the stock price cratering turned around.
Operation distraction - get their eye off the ball.
Any stock based on the fast paced technology industry you can expect to fluctuate wildly, often overnight. Obviously thats why you need a diversified portfolio to take things like that into account. It can be a high payoff but also at a high risk.
Recently Samsung was experiencing the samething with lowered stock prices.
I don't see stock prices necessarily synonymous with innovation. We have seen Apple with constant innovation for the last 12 years starting with the iPod, then the iPhone to the iPad. The MacBook Air, while first generation had its problems was fixed with new generations. It's innovation even caused Intel to compete with the Air with the UltraBooks PC version of simular laptops.
Don't forget simular problems under Steve Jobs such as with Antenna gate, Apple Maps ( Even though in the end I think it was a good move )
We know Steve has had his hand in many products/software/services after his death. Which will probably be 5-6 years into the future.
I'm sure (and hopeful) that Steve had his hand in many products that we can be thrilled with.
The real question is if Tim Cook can do anything with it. He is simply not, IMO, the complete package necessary to keep Apple on the trajectory Steve put in place.
@zgh
I will not comment on most of your lenghty post earlier. You seem very angry and irrational on most of it.
We all don't know much about his leadership qualities. We are not working there to experience it. And it also does NOT get reflected in a short term stock performance. Yes, SHORT TERM. We are talking about less than a year here and a bubble that has been built up before. Non of that is in corelation with his leadership qualities.
If your portfolio is that much hurt... when did you buy? At 700? I can understand that this would make you angry. But be rational here, you cannot blame a man's vision, charisma or leadership qualities for bursting a bubble.
In the long term, those characteristics may very well play into account of a stock performance. But as an investor, who is laughing at me for only holding 100, you should know that.
I will not comment on most of your lenghty post earlier. You seem very angry and irrational on most of it.
We all don't know much about his leadership qualities. We are not working there to experience it. And it also does NOT get reflected in a short term stock performance. Yes, SHORT TERM. We are talking about less than a year here and a bubble that has been built up before. Non of that is in corelation with his leadership qualities.
If your portfolio is that much hurt... when did you buy? At 700? I can understand that this would make you angry. But be rational here, you cannot blame a man's vision, charisma or leadership qualities for bursting a bubble.
In the long term, those characteristics may very well play into account of a stock performance. But as an investor, who is laughing at me for only holding 100, you should know that.
Last edited:
bluenix - would you please define "bubble"? It appears to me that you have latched on to a journalistic term to add credence to your view.
At $700 Apple still had a modest multiple - especially when compared to other high profile companies that are not even close to Apple's profit generation.
If Apple share price had fallen from $700 to $650 - not too concerning. Dropping to $550, a bigger concern. Falling to $450, and now under $400 - that is a cratering and Tim Cook failing in his primary objective - increasing shareholder value.
This trend is now 9 months old - not exactly so short term.
And to the earlier poster who was defending Cook due to the "tough" economic times - check out the market this morning - three days of triple digit gains for the Dow - the Dow at record highs (15,000+) - Apple up 70 pennies.
At $700 Apple still had a modest multiple - especially when compared to other high profile companies that are not even close to Apple's profit generation.
If Apple share price had fallen from $700 to $650 - not too concerning. Dropping to $550, a bigger concern. Falling to $450, and now under $400 - that is a cratering and Tim Cook failing in his primary objective - increasing shareholder value.
This trend is now 9 months old - not exactly so short term.
And to the earlier poster who was defending Cook due to the "tough" economic times - check out the market this morning - three days of triple digit gains for the Dow - the Dow at record highs (15,000+) - Apple up 70 pennies.
Last edited:
I consider a bubble as a development of a stock price that does not reflect real economic performance of the company or fundamental data (including outlook).
So if the stock price rises from $400 (early 2012) to over 600 in 3 Months, drops a bit and then reaches 700, then I see a bubble.
I am totally with you regarding the P/E ratio. A P/E ratio of around 10 is very low for Apple. But that's not the only KPI to base your investment decision on. Samsung has a P/E of 6 and is in a pretty strong market position right now. Amazon has a P/E that is somewhere between Moon and Mars. Google has a P/E twice as big as Apple.
I don't know if we are THAT much different in our views. Don't get me wrong, I don't like this development of AAPL. But after this really unusual rise last year, I don't consider this drop as a desaster. With stocks I prefer a much longer perspective when judging a development.
And I certainly don't see the stock price reflecting a poor or good performance of Tim Cook. The market has its own logics. Apple gets bashed a lot recently so many are scared and think they need to leave a sinking ship. I don't think it would look much different if Steve Jobs was still at the helm. He was known for doing his own thing and not paying too much attention to stock prices and things like that.
Sure, Steve was at charge when blockbuster like iPod, iPad and iPhone rose the stockprice. But after only 2 years I think it's too soon to judge Tim Cook for not releasing another revolutionary product. I think he is still on a roadmap that was laid out by SJ, so it wouldn't be much different now if Steve was around (product wise)
bluenix - where we do have a different opinion is that Steve did did his own thing, and by far and large it worked - magic and reality distortion field are two terms that have been used to describe Steve.
Tim Cook's performance is dismal from a shareholder viewpoint. He has stumbled on many fronts as I have outlined in a number of my earlier posts. Steve stumbled on occasion as well - but offset those stumbles with many great product introductions and how he IMPACTED THE MARKETS. Cook has done little with the pipeline he keeps touting, has a number of high profile stumbles (maps, China apology, Browett hiring and firing, etc.), is a poor communicator, and inspires little confidence on Wall Street. All of that is harming the stock.
I'm not sure where/when the next "gut check" event is. As another poster commented - I'm starting to assess an exit point - possibly connected with the fall / holiday period $550 or so - not sure yet.
Another poster (inexperienced investor IMO) was high fiving Apple due to the dividend ( which is low @ 3%). If I flip over for a dividend stock Apple would be very low on my list - waaaaaay to volatile and still a poor dividend yield. Another failure of Cook is the touted stock buyback as a means of bolstering the stock price. Apple is now down another $1.40 this morning while the Dow is up 120. The poor trend continues.
Tim Cook's performance is dismal from a shareholder viewpoint. He has stumbled on many fronts as I have outlined in a number of my earlier posts. Steve stumbled on occasion as well - but offset those stumbles with many great product introductions and how he IMPACTED THE MARKETS. Cook has done little with the pipeline he keeps touting, has a number of high profile stumbles (maps, China apology, Browett hiring and firing, etc.), is a poor communicator, and inspires little confidence on Wall Street. All of that is harming the stock.
I'm not sure where/when the next "gut check" event is. As another poster commented - I'm starting to assess an exit point - possibly connected with the fall / holiday period $550 or so - not sure yet.
Another poster (inexperienced investor IMO) was high fiving Apple due to the dividend ( which is low @ 3%). If I flip over for a dividend stock Apple would be very low on my list - waaaaaay to volatile and still a poor dividend yield. Another failure of Cook is the touted stock buyback as a means of bolstering the stock price. Apple is now down another $1.40 this morning while the Dow is up 120. The poor trend continues.
Last edited:
Let me add another bit of news - the new ads are being panned - no magic, no product, not very clear as to what that message is supposed to do, etc.
The news networks are, this morning, asking what Apple must do to get customers back.....
Now, I think that is BS.
Does Wall Street and the media now hate Apple?
Tim Cook MUST make Wall Street LOVE Apple - it is a major part of his job.
Steve, by far and large, had the Midas Touch. Tim, so far, has the Fecal Touch.
The news networks are, this morning, asking what Apple must do to get customers back.....
Now, I think that is BS.
Does Wall Street and the media now hate Apple?
Tim Cook MUST make Wall Street LOVE Apple - it is a major part of his job.
Steve, by far and large, had the Midas Touch. Tim, so far, has the Fecal Touch.
Let me add another bit of news - the new ads are being panned - no magic, no product, not very clear as to what that message is supposed to do, etc.
The news networks are, this morning, asking what Apple must do to get customers back.....
Now, I think that is BS.
Does Wall Street and the media now hate Apple?
Tim Cook MUST make Wall Street LOVE Apple - it is a major part of his job.
Steve, by far and large, had the Midas Touch. Tim, so far, has the Fecal Touch.
It is en-vogue to bash Apple right now. I wouldn't care that much about press these days. But it surely has an impact on the stock price. But then again, under Steve in 2008 the stock was diving, losing half its value.
And where was the revolutionary product between 2001 and 2007? Six full years of no market disrupting new product.
It is too early to call Tim Cook a failure as CEO. If you do that, then from a stock price perspecitve Steve failed big time in 2008 and innovation wise he lost it all between iPod and iPhone.
Things need time. Also at Apple. Rushing things out (like the latest iMac) is not the right way.
Apple's latest commercials and ads are a different story. There we can see the missing Steve Jobs (although I kinda like the latest "designed by apple" spots).
My belief is that it is a mistake to keep referencing five year old cycles during Steve's time as a "proof" that Cook is not yet failing. Steve had incredible success with some stumbles. With Cook, I am still waiting for some "magic" or solid indication of his ability as a person capable of taking Steve's "pipeline" and making it happen.
Also, that time period had entirely different competitors, basis of competition, technology, etc.
Cook has been at this CEO role (informally, and then formally) for a good period of time now and little to show for it that was not an extension of the trajectory Steve had established.
American executive search executives and consultants are in fairly tight agreement that the #1 mistake in dealing with questionable CEO performance is to keep waiting in the hopes that things will get better. They rarely do and serious damage is done to the corporation. Far better to take your hit, sack the sucker, and move on with a hopefully more capable person.
Just say'n......
Also, that time period had entirely different competitors, basis of competition, technology, etc.
Cook has been at this CEO role (informally, and then formally) for a good period of time now and little to show for it that was not an extension of the trajectory Steve had established.
American executive search executives and consultants are in fairly tight agreement that the #1 mistake in dealing with questionable CEO performance is to keep waiting in the hopes that things will get better. They rarely do and serious damage is done to the corporation. Far better to take your hit, sack the sucker, and move on with a hopefully more capable person.
Just say'n......
You don't really appear to be waiting.
No conflict of interest there, at all! In related news, the ice cream man says that the #1 mistake in dealing with summer heat is not buying enough ice cream!
Your post has a lot of cynicism in it but not much substance. How much real world executive experience do you have?
Quite probably less than you, based on the way you talk down to people, but ironically your posts' cynicism and lack of substance is what got me posting in the first place. Are you an executive?
You shouldn't really critique someone for having "only" 100 shares of Apple since it could be a larger percentage of their net worth than your holdings. What I'm trying to say is, you might get more sympathy for your portfolio being down in value (and your views in general) if you didn't treat someone else's $40,000 investment like it was chump change to you.
And you never did say what price you got in at.
Not only does your post wreak of cynicism and lacks substance, but it is off target. Where did I critique someone for having only 100 shares? Have you got me mixed up with someone else? Have you confused posts?
How am I talking down to you?
Tim Cook's utter lack in performance speaks for itself.
Just look at what happened to Apple under his leadership or lack of.
Stop with the excuses.