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

[pirg]

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.

Because you acted as if having "only" 100 shares means he's not worthy to speak on the subject. Not sure if you don't know how shares work or if you're just naturally condescending.

If you bought in at $20, and have 1500 shares, he'd still have risked more than you...the point being that the number of shares you have doesn't somehow make you more worthy of commenting on Apple's state.

Number of shares is a pretty dumb metric to associate someone's knowledge of a company with.

 

[zgh1999]

Because you acted as if having "only" 100 shares means he's not worthy to speak on the subject. Not sure if you don't know how shares work or if you're just naturally condescending.

If you bought in at $20, and have 1500 shares, he'd still have risked more than you...the point being that the number of shares you have doesn't somehow make you more worthy of commenting on Apple's state.

Number of shares is a pretty dumb metric to associate someone's knowledge of a company with.

No, no, it is YOU who have no clue "how shares work".

Whatever the cost basis he has, is irrelevant -- that is the past. His or my shares could have mysteriously fall down from the sky for all I care -- that does not matter -- what really matters is the amount at risk *NOW*.

Because MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY.

Now, get a clue and bugger off.

 

[bgillander]

How am I talking down to you?

Gee, I don't know...

No, no, it is YOU who have no clue "how shares work".

Whatever the cost basis he has, is irrelevant -- that is the past. His or my shares could have mysteriously fall down from the sky for all I care -- that does not matter -- what really matters is the amount at risk *NOW*.

Because MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY.

Now, get a clue and bugger off.

Oh yeah, now I remember.

Because MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY.

But shares are not money.

Whatever the cost basis he has, is irrelevant -- that is the past. ... -- what really matters is the amount at risk *NOW*.

Since you guys like to focus on short recent time periods (and not Cook's entire tenure) to illustrate your point, let's go all in and point out that Apple was up Friday while the markets were down. So by your crazy benchmarks, Tim was a great CEO on Friday. He might be a goat again on Monday, because the markets do that. If you have an aversion to risk, maybe you shouldn't be in the market, because they sometimes go down as fast as they go up (and sometimes faster.)

And if you truly believe that the cost basis is irrelevant, then you should definitely not be in the stock market.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

ah tim cook is such a crappy CEO, funny how when he was CEO and Steve was alive, he was doing fine.

 

[zgh1999]

Gee, I don't know...



Oh yeah, now I remember.



But shares are not money.



Since you guys like to focus on short recent time periods (and not Cook's entire tenure) to illustrate your point, let's go all in and point out that Apple was up Friday while the markets were down. So by your crazy benchmarks, Tim was a great CEO on Friday. He might be a goat again on Monday, because the markets do that. If you have an aversion to risk, maybe you shouldn't be in the market, because they sometimes go down as fast as they go up (and sometimes faster.)

And if you truly believe that the cost basis is irrelevant, then you should definitely not be in the stock market.

Hahaha, how is cost basis relevant, unless you are the IRS?

MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY IS MONEY.

Is that clear enough for your thick skull?

 

[bluenix]

It is a bit sad, how some of you people turned to insulting others rather than making your point by bringing up arguments.

My opinion here: even if you have just one stock, or even non, you're entitled to have your opinion on the stock performance and you might even know much more about it than someone holding 1000 stocks.

That being said, most of you here seem to make the lack of innovative products being responsible for the poor performance of AAPL.

I think it is a combination of both, a bubble that has been built up prior to this decline (400 -> 700 in a few months) and no blockbuster NEW product, that opens up new markets.

Then again, Steve would have never rushed a product out just to keep the stock price up. It was released when it was prime for the market. That's why he didn't just release an iPhone in 2004 (3 years after the iPod). It took time to have the right technology in place.

And if that means to wait 10 years for a new product category at Apple, i'm gladly waiting, as long as the company is financially stable and making good profits. In the long run, that secures success. If you rush out half baked products just to react to your competition, that would destroy Apples image.

They believe they have the best smartphone, tablet, ecosystem out there, and I tend to agree with them. And I don't see a mistake of Tim Cook if he follows Steve's advice in chosing wisely what you bring to market. And when!

 

[bgillander]

And if that means to wait 10 years for a new product category at Apple, i'm gladly waiting, as long as the company is financially stable and making good profits. In the long run, that secures success. If you rush out half baked products just to react to your competition, that would destroy Apples image.

Exactly this.

Apple cannot simply react to the stock market, because the stock market does not react simply. They can only follow their business plan, make the best products they can, and hope that the market reacts rationally (which is never guaranteed.)

 

[zgh1999]

Exactly this.

Apple cannot simply react to the stock market, because the stock market does not react simply. They can only follow their business plan, make the best products they can, and hope that the market reacts rationally (which is never guaranteed.)

Absolute nonsense.

Under Jobs, Apple can afford to ignore the stock market because its got solid leadership with a vision and also a great product pipeline that delivered innovative products.

But without Jobs and, more critically, in the absence of innovative products and capable leadership with vision, Apple does not have that luxury of being able to ignore the market.

Ultimately, the market does not lie.

The fact remains that AAPL is significantly discounted now by the market because of the utter lack of vision and leadership in Tim Cook.

He should step up or step out.

It is as simple as that.

 

[bluenix]

Absolute nonsense.

Under Jobs, Apple can afford to ignore the stock market because its got solid leadership with a vision and also a great product pipeline that delivered innovative products.

But without Jobs and, more critically, in the absence of innovative products and capable leadership with vision, Apple does not have that luxury of being able to ignore the market.

Ultimately, the market does not lie.

The fact remains that AAPL is significantly discounted now by the market because of the utter lack of vision and leadership in Tim Cook.

He should step up or step out.

It is as simple as that.

A company can "correct" a stock price A LITTLE BIT. Paying dividends or buying back stocks are two ways. Tim has done / announced both.

I am not with you, that the current slide is ONLY attributed to a lack of innovation. Sure, the stock exchange is eagerly waiting for the next big Apple thing. But do you really think, that just 2 years after SJ is gone, they are not on a roadmap anymore that has his signature? In other words: even with Steve around there wouldn't be a big TV or an iWatch right now. And I'm pretty certain, the media would have an even greater pleasure on blaming Steve Jobs, dethroning him.

I stick to my opinion. Yes, the stock price is down ALSO because we are all waiting for the next big thing. But the iPad is only 3 years old and even a company under SJ isn't able to thow out a revolutionary product every year. To get it right you even HAVE to wait longer. And don't care about the stock exchange too much.

I don't think ANY of us can judge Tim's vision or leadership skills. Only people on the board at Apple can.

 

[zgh1999]

A company can "correct" a stock price A LITTLE BIT. Paying dividends or buying back stocks are two ways. Tim has done / announced both.

I am not with you, that the current slide is ONLY attributed to a lack of innovation. Sure, the stock exchange is eagerly waiting for the next big Apple thing. But do you really think, that just 2 years after SJ is gone, they are not on a roadmap anymore that has his signature? In other words: even with Steve around there wouldn't be a big TV or an iWatch right now. And I'm pretty certain, the media would have an even greater pleasure on blaming Steve Jobs, dethroning him.

I stick to my opinion. Yes, the stock price is down ALSO because we are all waiting for the next big thing. But the iPad is only 3 years old and even a company under SJ isn't able to thow out a revolutionary product every year. To get it right you even HAVE to wait longer. And don't care about the stock exchange too much.

I don't think ANY of us can judge Tim's vision or leadership skills. Only people on the board at Apple can.

No no, I never said the stock price is down due only to a lack of innovation. It is also down due to an utter lack of vision, leadership qualities in Tim Cook, not to mention the mistakes that Apple made under him. He simply does not cut it as a CEO for a company of Apple's profile.

This combination of things that is ultimately attributable to Tim Cook has led the market to SEVERELY DISCOUNT AAPL, the the point of pricing it more more like Dell than even MSFT.

Wake up your idea and get your head out of the sand and see things as they are.

If Tim Cook is not removed as CEO of Apple soon, we will see Apple degenerate to become MSFT and eventually DELL. It is that bad.

And no, as an Apple shareholder, I have a right to judge Tim Cook, as well as the Board of Directors of Apple.

So don't tell me that I can't judge them.

 

[bluenix]

No no, I never said the stock price is down due only to a lack of innovation. It is also down due to an utter lack of vision, leadership qualities in Tim Cook, not to mention the mistakes that Apple made under him. He simply does not cut it as a CEO for a company of Apple's profile.

This combination of things that is ultimately attributable to Tim Cook has led the market to SEVERELY DISCOUNT AAPL, the the point of pricing it more more like Dell than even MSFT.

Wake up your idea and get your head out of the sand and see things as they are.

If Tim Cook is not removed as CEO of Apple soon, we will see Apple degenerate to become MSFT and eventually DELL. It is that bad.

And no, as an Apple shareholder, I have a right to judge Tim Cook, as well as the Board of Directors of Apple.

So don't tell me that I can't judge them.

You can judge Tim Cook. Even if you don't hold any stocks. But judging his leadership qualities as well as his vision??? Where do you get the information on that?

Then tell me what exactly has Tim cook done wrong? Not sharing his vision with you? Well, Steve hardly did that either. His leadership style? We don't know much about it (a little more is know about SJ on that matter, and it's not quite positive).

What comes to my mind is the early release of the iMac before all hickups in production have been moved out of the way. Other than that I hardly see a mistake.

 

[zgh1999]

You can judge Tim Cook. Even if you don't hold any stocks. But judging his leadership qualities as well as his vision??? Where do you get the information on that?

Then tell me what exactly has Tim cook done wrong? Not sharing his vision with you? Well, Steve hardly did that either. His leadership style? We don't know much about it (a little more is know about SJ on that matter, and it's not quite positive).

What comes to my mind is the early release of the iMac before all hickups in production have been moved out of the way. Other than that I hardly see a mistake.

Excuse me?

I don't need you to tell me what I can judge or can't judge.

That is my prerogative.

And don't order me to tell you this or that. Get some manners.

Now, back off and get out of my face.

 

[bgillander]

And don't order me to tell you this or that. Get some manners.

That is one ironic pair of sentences!