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

[gnasher729]

If you think APPL has taken a dive now. Just wait until the sales numbers come in for the IPhone 5S. (they will be dismal)

If you can short APPL, do it.

You can't short APPL. APPL hasn't been trading for ages.

And seriously, someone who recommends shorting APPL deserves all the ridicule they can get. If someone recommends shorting AAPL, I would ask them to do it themselves with their own money. As long as they have any.

 

[Merlin9]

You can't short APPL. APPL hasn't been trading for ages.

And seriously, someone who recommends shorting APPL deserves all the ridicule they can get. If someone recommends shorting AAPL, I would ask them to do it themselves with their own money. As long as they have any.

Then just take a look at the chart. In this forum everybody declard those who thought it would be a good idea to sell AAPL at 600 dollars as crazy. And now look ath the stock. Apple stopped innovating. Every other company is at least experimenting with ultrabooks and touchscreens, phones etc.. But not Apple. They don't change anything except components from Intel in their notebooks and they don't innovate their phones and Ipads anymore. But they tell the crowd that they try so much and it means so much for them to build Apple products. Hey, its about the products and about innovation not about charity Tim!

So if there won't be a revolutionary TV or another revolutionary product Apple will get serious problems and this time Steve won't come back...

 

[Bubba Satori]

Can't innovate if you're focused on stock price...

This might be helpful for future reference.

 

[Rogifan]

Then just take a look at the chart. In this forum everybody declard those who thought it would be a good idea to sell AAPL at 600 dollars as crazy. And now look ath the stock. Apple stopped innovating. Every other company is at least experimenting with ultrabooks and touchscreens, phones etc.. But not Apple. They don't change anything except components from Intel in their notebooks and they con
't innovate their phones and Ipads anymore. But they tell the crowd that they try so much and it means so much for them to build Apple products. Hey, its about the products and about innovation not about charity Tim!

So if there won't be a revolutionary TV or another revolutionary product Apple will get serious problems and this time Steve won't come back...

You honestly think Apple doesn't have a touchscreen MacBook or iMac because they don't know how to innovate? Please. It might turn out that Apple is wrong and people want touch screen PCs but it wouldn't be because Apple doesn't know how to innovate. Also just making bigger screens on phones isn't innovation. Again if Apple thought a 5" phone was a good idea we'd have one.

Nothing is different with Apple between when Wall Street ran it up to $700 and now. It's not like they were innovating last summer and then just stopped. This whole isn't innovating canard is stupid.

 

[Merlin9]

You honestly think Apple doesn't have a touchscreen MacBook or iMac because they don't know how to innovate? Please. It might turn out that Apple is wrong and people want touch screen PCs but it wouldn't be because Apple doesn't know how to innovate. Also just making bigger screens on phones isn't innovation. Again if Apple thought a 5" phone was a good idea we'd have one.

Nothing is different with Apple between when Wall Street ran it up to $700 and now. It's not like they were innovating last summer and then just stopped. This whole isn't innovating canard is stupid.

No its not stupid because your argument is that Apple knows what is best and the customer therefore doesn't want innovation or changes. I think that's wrong. Apple doesn't know what the customers want. Steve Jobs was the innovator and he is dead and I cannot see that there is a new innovator in the house. And maybe its not about innovation but maybe they want to protect Ipad sales and thats why they dont't experiment with touchscreen ultrabooks/ convertibles etc...

I still like Apple products but at the moment I need an ultrabook/notebook and if Apple would offer a product similar to the Ativ Q or Lenovo Yoga I would buy it in a heartbeat but as it is how it is I don't...

 

[dmax35]

a reminder that most of the criticism are coming from people who

1. never used the new mac pro
2. saw the beta version of an OS
3. claims their "friends" are now switching to android

Excellent reply I love it. The trolls and their android geek friends.

 

[TennisandMusic]

You're completely missing the point of the Mac Pro if you think the only innovation is the size. Sure, it may not be what existing Mac Pro owners want... but how do we know that being different automatically makes it worse? Here's a good write-up on just why the new Mac Pro *could* end up being a game-changer. It's not all about the CPU:

http://kickingbear.com/blog/archives/349

Of course, there's a chance that the new Mac Pro doesn't gain much traction. But you can't write it off when many similar gambles have paid off for Apple. Just as nobody needs this new Mac Pro, nobody needed a 10" iPod touch. The perception in 2010 was that if somebody already had an iPhone or an iPod touch, why would a bigger version of those be anything special? And if somebody already had a much more powerful laptop, why would they want an iPad either?

And that's where we are with the new Mac Pro. Nobody sees why it's necessary... but I have a feeling we'll find out why when people truly begin to make use of it.

That "article" is atrocious. What does the Mac Pro have that any PC does not have? Seriously. It's just a CPU with two GPUs, and according to this artlcle (not sure if it's true or not), you can't even use one of the GPUs for graphics at all! You can do ANYTHING you want with a PC. You can run compute on one or multiple cards. It's not a game changer at all.

That blog is written as if it comes from an incredibly ignorant person easily duped by the Apple marketing sphere. No one should take it seriously. I was actually pretty shocked Gruber linked to it (I'm guessing you saw it there as well), but then maybe that just betrays the fact Gruber doesn't know all that much.

 

[koban4max]

It would be a lot more than you know.

Same goes for you.

 

[Tubamajuba]

That "article" is atrocious. What does the Mac Pro have that any PC does not have? Seriously. It's just a CPU with two GPUs, and according to this artlcle (not sure if it's true or not), you can't even use one of the GPUs for graphics at all! You can do ANYTHING you want with a PC. You can run compute on one or multiple cards. It's not a game changer at all.

That blog is written as if it comes from an incredibly ignorant person easily duped by the Apple marketing sphere. No one should take it seriously. I was actually pretty shocked Gruber linked to it (I'm guessing you saw it there as well), but then maybe that just betrays the fact Gruber doesn't know all that much.

I see what you're saying, and you're right- a tried and true PC (or heck, even a current-gen Mac Pro) has a lot more flexibility than the upcoming Mac Pro. But again, Apple's products are rarely been the most flexible in their category. I understand that what separates this from other things like the original iPhone and iPad is that Apple had a previous product in the same category that was indeed more flexible. I understand why that's off-putting, and I fully understand why many users of previous Mac Pros won't be jumping to buy the new Mac Pro when it's released.

But maybe the early adopters will discover something about the configuration that makes it special. What will that be? I don't know. All I know is that Apple has already released plenty of seemingly "meh" products that eventually took off and became huge successes. The new Mac Pro may not be one of them. We just don't know, and it's kind of silly to write it off before the first one has even been sold.

 

[iGrip]

But maybe the early adopters will discover something about the configuration that makes it special. What will that be?.

It looks badass sitting on top of your desk. It makes you look like an executive.

 

[Rogifan]

No its not stupid because your argument is that Apple knows what is best and the customer therefore doesn't want innovation or changes. I think that's wrong. Apple doesn't know what the customers want. Steve Jobs was the innovator and he is dead and I cannot see that there is a new innovator in the house. And maybe its not about innovation but maybe they want to protect Ipad sales and thats why they dont't experiment with touchscreen ultrabooks/ convertibles etc...

I still like Apple products but at the moment I need an ultrabook/notebook and if Apple would offer a product similar to the Ativ Q or Lenovo Yoga I would buy it in a heartbeat but as it is how it is I don't...

Steve Jobs was the only innovatorat Apple? How so? When he was around there were other PCs/phones/tablets/mp3 players that had more features, better specs and did more than Apple products. Also, since you seem so fixated on convertibles, when did Steve ever indicate touchscreen Macs or an iPad/Mac hybrid was a good idea?

I'm sorry but just because you want a laptop/tablet hybrid doesn't make it an innovation. And just because Apple chooses not sell a convertible device doesn't mean they don't know how to innovate. What it means is they think convertibles suck right now and basically give you a mediocre tablet and mediocre laptop experience. You might not agree but that doesn't mean Apple can't innovate. Also where is the evidence that everyone wants convertible devices? It's not like these things are flying off the shelves.

 

[Cartaphilus]

Are we reading too much into this modification? What I took from the SEC filing is that Tim Cook wants an equity-based incentive for his managers that includes the potential for both an annually-measured upside and a downside modification based on performance. He presumably thought it unseemly for him to be in a position where his own stock-based compensation was insulated from annual performance (unless he was terminated) while managing employees whose compensation was at risk. He simply asked the Compensation Committee to modify his plan to make it more like those of his team while avoiding adding any upside potential for himself.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

MacOSX isnt a touchscreen os. I dont see why apple will release a toichscreen laptop. In fact a touch screen laptop is just an ipad with a keyboard now that office is on the iPad.

Given the number of complaints of windows 8 and the continual downward spiral of sales for PCs not made by apple, im guessing touchscreen laptops/desktops arent the rage

 

[linuxcooldude]

Apple stopped innovating. Every other company is at least experimenting with ultrabooks and touchscreens, phones etc.. But not Apple.

Ahem...Ultrabooks came out in direct response to Apples MacBook Airs, something already innovative.

Coming out with all kinds of flippy tablet/laptop hybrid combos, trying to take a random shot in the dark, does not make it innovative. It takes much thought into a product...before it comes to market.

I'm sure Apple though of many simular ideas, but quickly dismissed them. Just because all these companies come out with such things, does not mean they should.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

Apple also missed out on the netbook craze. Dont remember people questioning their "innovation" back then

 

[TennisandMusic]

I see what you're saying, and you're right- a tried and true PC (or heck, even a current-gen Mac Pro) has a lot more flexibility than the upcoming Mac Pro. But again, Apple's products are rarely been the most flexible in their category. I understand that what separates this from other things like the original iPhone and iPad is that Apple had a previous product in the same category that was indeed more flexible. I understand why that's off-putting, and I fully understand why many users of previous Mac Pros won't be jumping to buy the new Mac Pro when it's released.

But maybe the early adopters will discover something about the configuration that makes it special. What will that be? I don't know. All I know is that Apple has already released plenty of seemingly "meh" products that eventually took off and became huge successes. The new Mac Pro may not be one of them. We just don't know, and it's kind of silly to write it off before the first one has even been sold.

Well I, for one, hope the new Mac Pro is awesome. I would buy it. I just didn't like the fact Gruber linked to that article when what was written within it was pure hogwash. It's just PC parts in a very cool new form factor, and yes there are limitations. Maybe it will still be incredible, and maybe Apple has been working incredibly hard on OpenCL enabled implementations of more of their software. If so this Mac Pro would be wicked. But there are definitely roadblocks to GPGPU based software, and all of it is possible on the PC side as well. That's the problem. In a lot of ways it's all the same stuff, you're just getting Apple packaging.

We will see what happens...

 

[Apple Corps]

i don't think you get apple. You're probably the same shill who argued that apple didn't invent the iphone and invent the ipod then come around and argue apple is all about looks that you don't agree with. Realize that looks are opinions and accept that people can agree/disagree with you. This reminds me of when they released the ipad, OH JUST A BIGGER IPHONE LOL INNOVATION, or when they released an ipod touch LOL JUST AN iPHONE W/O THE PHONE or released the retina display LOL ALL "MARKETING" TALK

ayway, back on topic. this is suspicious to me as tim cook also recently announced the stock buyback. it's obvioulsy good to have it be incentive based if he believes stock price will be going up and apple certainly will make sure of this.

If they think the stock is going up why did a number of them sell off $85 million worth of shares as reported today?


Cook incentivizes his 1M restricted stock unit payout as top brass net $86.5M in share selloff
A number of top Apple executives, including CEO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppenheimer, on Friday sold off recently vested restricted stock units worth a total of nearly $86.5 million, while Cook asked the board to incentivize his award.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

If they think the stock is going up why did a number of them sell off $85 million worth of shares as reported today?


Cook incentivizes his 1M restricted stock unit payout as top brass net $86.5M in share selloff
A number of top Apple executives, including CEO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppenheimer, on Friday sold off recently vested restricted stock units worth a total of nearly $86.5 million, while Cook asked the board to incentivize his award.

Shrug executives have to tell the SEC to sell shares in advance as to not be seen as insider trading so hard to say. I also havent seen this reported anywhere...

 

[Renzatic]

Also just making bigger screens on phones isn't innovation. Again if Apple thought a 5" phone was a good idea we'd have one.

I'm gonna use the "there is no such thing as the perfect sauce, only perfect sauces" quote again. I'm gonna throw it out every time someone brings up the "if Apple thought X screen size was a good idea, they would make it" argument, because it applies so perfectly here.

Yes. It's true. Some people prefer the old 3.5" or current skinny 4" phones. Some people don't, and want a larger screen. Those who do are out buying Android phones instead because Apple isn't catering to their demographic. They're losing business to companies who understand there's no such thing as one size fits all.

 

[Apple Corps]

Shrug executives have to tell the SEC to sell shares in advance as to not be seen as insider trading so hard to say. I also havent seen this reported anywhere...

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13...payout-as-top-brass-net-854m-in-share-selloff

 

[Fwink!]

I think this isa good deal for Tim Cook, and a nod by Apple of his appreciated performance to date for Apple to alter his initial compensation plan.

By taking yearly installments of his stock awards, he can take advantage of stock splits and sell offs as they occur, as it's unlikely there will be a significant Apple downturn in that time frame.

Mr. Cook can also consider retirement in the not entirely immediate future, and acquiesce from his position at Apple gracefully, and when the timing is best for both parties.

His even keel approach has brought a stability to Apple's development cycle that I think we are all adjusting to. So why shouldn't his compensation reflect his management style; steady, reliable, and well managed?

 

[liavman]

pretty shocked Gruber linked to it (I'm guessing you saw it there as well), but then maybe that just betrays the fact Gruber doesn't know all that much.

You are trashing Guy English at a superficial level. Than man knows what he is talking about as a game developer. Also game computation is not just about dealing with graphics. Wait around and let us see what the deal with the machine is. As you wrote in a post above, parallel processing is about software and let us see what Apple does in that area.

 

[Fishticks]

I hope he's not getting taxed.
That's so little money, AAPL should be paying more so he can go on innovating even more everyday and every minute of a day.

 

[MacDav]

Same goes for you.

Wow, just to set the record straight I didn't make the post that you responded to. My name is on it, but I didn't post that message. There's some kind of mix up. The macrumors server has the hicups?

 

[gnasher729]

No its not stupid because your argument is that Apple knows what is best and the customer therefore doesn't want innovation or changes. I think that's wrong. Apple doesn't know what the customers want. Steve Jobs was the innovator and he is dead and I cannot see that there is a new innovator in the house. And maybe its not about innovation but maybe they want to protect Ipad sales and thats why they dont't experiment with touchscreen ultrabooks/ convertibles etc...

I still like Apple products but at the moment I need an ultrabook/notebook and if Apple would offer a product similar to the Ativ Q or Lenovo Yoga I would buy it in a heartbeat but as it is how it is I don't...

This is such a load of nonsense. You are confusing "innovation" with "change for changes sake". Kids posting on MacRumors don't know the difference, Apple does. Laptops are not tablets. People buying laptops want laptops, not tablets with keyboards. Tablets with keyboards are impractical as tablets, and impractical as laptops.

"Steve Jobs was the innovator"? What a load of nonsense again. What Steve Jobs did, around 2001, was to come up with a strategy that would create a long term successful company (while Michael Dell, for example, came up with a strategy that would create a short term successful company). Sure, Jobs would have been able to give the right answer to the question "should we use touch screens in laptops or not", unlike Dell, but Tim Cook can do that just as well.

Some people are probably be impressed by "Ultrabooks", but these things first need to be released, then you need to read the price tag, then you may not have noticed it, but Windows 8 is universally despised, so if you want a laptop "like an Ativ or Yogi" then why don't you go ahead and buy it? Or is it that they are lacking something that Samsung and Lenovo can't provide, and you know it, and that's why you want a Mac?

----------

If they think the stock is going up why did a number of them sell off $85 million worth of shares as reported today?

Because you can't buy a new Ferrari with shares that you hold, only with the money that you get by selling shares. Try going to a Ferrari dealer. They won't give you a car because you are rich with shares and expect to become even richer. They give you a car if you hand over the cash.