Apple CEO Tim Cook Earned $10.3M in Fiscal 2015, Up From $9.2M in 2014

[robeddie]

Yeah, because that's comparable...


Every year. EVERY YEAR, people like you talk about how bad things are going for Apple, and how much of a buffoon Tim Cook is. Yet, every year they increase their sales, they increase their profit, and they increase share price. And every year they nail it on the prediction of what their performance is going to be. So they obviously know a HELL of a lot more about the way that company should run than you do.

And let's not lose sight of the fact that Steve Jobs hand picked Tim Cook to help bring Apple out of the dumpers. He then hand picked him to succeed him. And he pretty much gave Jony Ive carte blanche for life at Apple. So he must have seen something in them.

I am a stockholder with nearly $100,000 invested in Apple. And I am quite fine with the crew that's running it.

By the way, as a (presumably) good investor, you should be attuned to the canary in the mine - the growing number of people on this site that you frequent, showing much more negativity about Apple than they ever have in the 14 years I've been on MacRumors. Maybe that means nothing. But perhaps ... it's an indication of what's to come for Apple.

Only the future will tell

 

[69650]

Angela Ahrendts must be the most overpaid executive in the world. Has she actually done anything yet to deserve these massive bonuses? If she has I haven't noticed it.

 

[TallManNY]

I don't think you read my entire post as I addressed that at the bottom.

You are right. I missed that last sentence.
But if you are going to compare CEO compensation then you have to look at cash and stock compensation together. I doubt any other CEO has received a stock package as large as Tim Cook has. They may have gotten stock packages that grew into something insanely large. Ballmer comes to mind and his Microsoft stock. But I think Tim's package was worth hundreds of millions when it was issued to him. Last summer I think it was valued at a billion dollars. And it hasn't been very long since he got it.
[doublepost=1452217839][/doublepost]

Angela Ahrendts must be the most overpaid executive in the world. Has she actually done anything yet to deserve these massive bonuses? If she has I haven't noticed it.

I don't know if she gets credit, but buying something in an Apple store is insanely easy. I just walk in, there are tons of sales people all over, they are super friendly and fairly knowledgeable, they ring the thing up on their gadget, I tap my phone to Apple pay, the receipt is emailed to me, and I leave. In a busy store transactions can take two minutes. It is kind of crazy. I can't buy a pack of gum most days from the big chain grocery stores faster. It is definitely the best overall shopping experience outside of maybe the super high end fashion stores where they might bring me a beverage while I shop.

 

[macfacts]

Where can I get an iPhone with 4GB RAM? That would make me pretty happy too.

Besides that, you are missing the whole point. Which is people getting hand-me-down phones and using only a fraction of what they're meant for may be okay with limited storage, but they're not the ones buying the device for those limited uses. Would your mom pay $750 for a 6s plus with only 16 gig in it to run facetime and her banking app? Few people's mothers would.

I can't imagine anyone who feels they'll use the phone enough to justify a $750 price tag will use it for so little that 16 gig of ram is a good choice. What is it now, about 20 minutes of video to completely fill the device? Don't forget iOS takes up a few gigs too.

If you're upset about the price tag, complain about that, don't complain about 16GB base storage. "You're complaining wrong." Apple offers larger storage options if 16GB is not enough for your personal usage.

 

[S-A]

I thought I saw somewhere that Tim Cook's stock didn't split?

They definitely split... it wouldn't make sense if it didn't split.

You guys all need to read my post back on page 5. You're thinking far too deep into his compensation... he's well compensated, people! Stop trying to wrap your head around $10MM and create scenarios in your head lol.

 

[Reds622]

You are right. I missed that last sentence.
But if you are going to compare CEO compensation then you have to look at cash and stock compensation together. I doubt any other CEO has received a stock package as large as Tim Cook has. They may have gotten stock packages that grew into something insanely large. Ballmer comes to mind and his Microsoft stock. But I think Tim's package was worth hundreds of millions when it was issued to him. Last summer I think it was valued at a billion dollars. And it hasn't been very long since he got it.
[doublepost=1452217839][/doublepost]

I don't know if she gets credit, but buying something in an Apple store is insanely easy. I just walk in, there are tons of sales people all over, they are super friendly and fairly knowledgeable, they ring the thing up on their gadget, I tap my phone to Apple pay, the receipt is emailed to me, and I leave. In a busy store transactions can take two minutes. It is kind of crazy. I can't buy a pack of gum most days from the big chain grocery stores faster. It is definitely the best overall shopping experience outside of maybe the super high end fashion stores where they might bring me a beverage while I shop.

All of that existed prior to her arrival, except for Apple Pay I suppose, which she undoubtedly had nothing to do with.

In fact, if she had it her way, supposedly, you wouldn't even visit the Apple Store to make a purchase. Apparently purchases for Apples newest items should be made online..

 

[rdlink]

Yep. And ONE day ... I guarantee you ... you will realize you held onto your stock in Apple just a little too long. Just like so many other investors who were convinced the sky was ALWAYS the limit. Good luck to you.

Well, thanks. But I don't invest with dice, or by cutting cards, or by going with my gut, or hair on the back of the neck feelings. I look at the reality of the situation that Apple's P/E ratio continues to show them as a bargain stock, and that they will likely be over $200 by the time 2017 rings in.

For over a decade people have been saying that AAPL can't continue to climb. Yet it does.

I'll invest my money based on the healthy horse that keeps winning rather than the advice of the guy leaning against the rail, telling me why I'm making a mistake, while he's holding the ticket for the 40-1 trifecta.
[doublepost=1452229851][/doublepost]

By the way, as a (presumably) good investor, you should be attuned to the canary in the mine - the growing number of people on this site that you frequent, showing much more negativity about Apple than they ever have in the 14 years I've been on MacRumors. Maybe that means nothing. But perhaps ... it's an indication of what's to come for Apple.

Only the future will tell

Actually, if you look a little closer, with less jaded glasses you will see that the negativity has been around for a long, long time:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.500/

 

[Max(IT)]

I don't really care about how much Tim or Angela earns.

What really amused me is seeing "high qualified" people here criticize long time experienced high end executives.
I'm sure any of you could do better, and I don't know why apple isn't hiring people from this thread.

 

[profmjh]

Having caught up with the thread, some thoughts . . .

It does feel to me like Apple made some mis-steps last calendar year, and I speak as someone who spent a lot of money on their products. I happen to think the Apple Watch is a beautiful object and cleverly designed, except that it's so woefully underpowered that almost all apps are worthless. The new iMacs have great screens, but then they put 5500rpm drives in the base models. Seriously? And they gutted fusion drives, leaving them with a pathetic 32GB of flash. The Apple TV is pretty, but the OS is beta at best: it's not remotely ready, rather like Watch OS. (What? No new clock faces? No market in 3rd party clock faces?)

I don't actually agree with those who attack the MacBook's lack of ports. Apple was the first to get rid of floppy disk drives, then CD/DVD drives, and now ports. I use my computer for many hours a day and I very, very rarely need use a port. If I had a MacBook, I'd be fine plugging in the adapter.

Why don't I have a MacBook? I bought one and sent it back: the screen was too small. And that's a problem with the current laptop line-up. Apple literally has nothing I can buy. The MacBooks are too small, the Airs aren't retina, and the Pros are old and we all know they're a few weeks/months away from being replaced. I have to keep my wallet shut and wait.

Back to mis-steps . . . their production and supply has been a mess. The Apple Watch launch was a farce. And then to launch iPad Pro with huge waits on the Pencil and the Smart Keyboard! Fanboys defend everything Apple does, right or wrong, but there's no way Apple wanted it to be like that.

On the other hand, my experience is that Apple customer service is the best of any company in the world. No questions asked refunds – and fast, too. I always have complete confidence buying from them.

Final thought -- Tim Cook is paid plenty. CEO salaries in general disgust me. No-one -- no-one -- needs tens of millions of dollars. It's pure, naked, sickening greed. I don't care how much profit the company makes. As for Ahrendts -- apparently no-one knows what she does, and it's an utter mystery how she's leeched so much cash and stock from Apple.

Oh, and PS The keyboard and trackpad on the MacBook are fantastic. I utterly adore them.

Oh, and PPS Apple brings a lot of this criticism on itself. Its cultish keynote presentations massively overhype the products and set up expectations that are certain to be disappointed. It has a habit of releasing technologically clever but unfinished products, the software usually being the weak link. It has learnt little from the Maps debacle. Nothing has been quite that bad, but the attitude seems to be "as soon as the software does something, release the hardware and wait for the cash to roll in".

 

[robeddie]

Well, thanks. But I don't invest with dice, or by cutting cards, or by going with my gut, or hair on the back of the neck feelings. I look at the reality of the situation that Apple's P/E ratio continues to show them as a bargain stock, and that they will likely be over $200 by the time 2017 rings in.

For over a decade people have been saying that AAPL can't continue to climb. Yet it does.

I'll invest my money based on the healthy horse that keeps winning rather than the advice of the guy leaning against the rail, telling me why I'm making a mistake, while he's holding the ticket for the 40-1 trifecta.
[doublepost=1452229851][/doublepost]

Actually, if you look a little closer, with less jaded glasses you will see that the negativity has been around for a long, long time:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.500/

Ahhh, let's just agree to disagree and re-join our discussion in a couple years. 'Cause one thing we do know for sure is that time will prove one of us right

 

[DoctorKrabs]

I don't really care about how much Tim or Angela earns.

What really amused me is seeing "high qualified" people here criticize long time experienced high end executives.
I'm sure any of you could do better, and I don't know why apple isn't hiring people from this thread.

Your profile image criticizes Google.

Let's see you make a better company.

Derp.

 

[Gudi]

Fair enough but if one person had to go, wasn't it better that it was Forstall? Even if you think putting Ive on the software team was a mistake?

He is not on the software team, he has no idea about software. He is now responsible for everything design and that includes human interface design, which he has no experience in either. Skeuomorphism was a great innovation about the 1984 Macintosh and maybe Apples biggest strength so far. The desktop with icons of files and folders made the computer easy and fun to use. Flat design might be more appropriate for the age of touch screens, but we shouldn't forget everything we've learned about human-computer-interaction. For example the little "poof of smoke" that appeared prior to Yosemite when you removed an icon from the dock. This animation served an important purpose, it wouldn't just tell but show you, where the icon was gone (up in thin air). Flat design is in danger of losing much of this sense of interaction with real world objects. And that raises doubts, if the New Apple is still capable of coming up with something as simple and fun as the trash bin metaphor, which of course is completely skeuomorph. I don't know if the ousting of Forstall is representative of this change, but the company needs someone high up the ranks, who is willing to put up a fight for the benefits of skeuomorphism and realism in an increasingly flat and abstract world. Someone to build the computer for the rest of us, while all others run the same dull boxes.

 

[Karma*Police]

I would argue that too light isn't good or comfortable to use. I'll take for example my ipod touch, it's so thin I have trouble holding/grabbing it correctly and really light, which makes me forget i put it on my lap or something and drop it.

Yeah, I'm sure people will have different preferences and mobile is always about trade offs and trying to hit that sweet spot. Thus far, I think Apple has done that very well. My HTC M8 for example is only slightly bigger in every dimension than the 6s yet it feels like a brick compared to the 6s.

Personally, I've always thought that the ideal iPhone would be something like the iPod touch. Further out - almost sci-fi realm - my ideal device would be something as thin and light as a stack of 4 or 8 credit cards that can be unfolded to increase the display size 4x to 8x when needed.

 

[DMinTX]

could someone please post the chinese salaries + the cost of the net to prevent them from suicide?

This has little to do with Apple and a lot to do with China.

China is a Communist country that is beginning the let small tastes of Capitalism slip in. For most of China, they work at an assigned job and get basically room, board and a stipend for food and personal items. How hard they work buys them nothing but being more tired. Even the NBA star Yao Ming is required to forfeit like 90%+ of his NBA salary to the Chinese government to maintain his passport privilege and continue to play in the US.

Places like Foxconn are allowed to actually create a meritocracy where harder work is rewarded with higher compensation. Companies like Apple put conditions in their contracts that allow for increased workers' rights. It is a compromise by the Chinese government to get Apple and others to bring their business there. The Chinese government takes a huge chunk of Foxconn's revenues in return.

The Chinese people are so hungry for the freedom this brings to their lives they become desperate to get and keep a job at one of these places and are willing to work themselves to death to increase the opportuinties they can provide they families.

 

[stanman64]

I can't even imagine sitting there during that interview... "So the position salary is $1,000,000 a year. You in?"

I would need new pants.

 

[navaira]

Or, when you're Angela, "Well I don't know about that. I will be needing $70,001,196 in shares before I say yes."

 

[springsup]

I believe that capitalism can be a positive force. And that amazing CEOs of amazing companies should be well compensated. I also believe in reasonable regulation, and taxation. We currently do not have enough of the right corporate regulations in place, nor do we tax the richest even CLOSE to where we should (hint: we should switch to a wealth tax, not an income tax). So... I think Tim should be paid more, but he also should probably be paying more taxes as an individual, his company should be paying WAY more in taxes, and absolutely, industries should be more regulated on many levels, including all sorts of things that make it exceptionally difficult for companies to, say, enlist overseas "slave" labor. The fact is, Apple is probably by far one of the MOST responsible companies that uses overseas contract manufacturing labor, and is also one of the most environmentally active of any major company. Apple, to be blunt, isn't even CLOSE to representing the worst of the corporate world.

I know Apple isn't the worst (although Steve Jobs, with his $1 salary and massive executive "gifts", including a Gulfstream Jet, was up there with the biggest corporate arseholes).

The problem I have is with the scale of pay. Sure, Tim Cook is high in the chain and should earn more, but 374x the average wage? Making more than the average American makes in a year every single day? That's absurd.

It's not the theory of it: sure, higher-ups can be paid more. We don't need total wage equality (however fascinating that would be). My problem is with the practical side: just how much more should they earn? 5x? 10x? I don't know, but I know that 374x is too much.

We need a wage cap. Possibly along the lines of "the highest-paid employee can only make a maximum of X times the amount made by the lowest-paid". That's my opinion.

 

[jujufreeze]

I know Apple isn't the worst (although Steve Jobs, with his $1 salary and massive executive "gifts", including a Gulfstream Jet, was up there with the biggest corporate arseholes).

The problem I have is with the scale of pay. Sure, Tim Cook is high in the chain and should earn more, but 374x the average wage? Making more than the average American makes in a year every single day? That's absurd.

It's not the theory of it: sure, higher-ups can be paid more. We don't need total wage equality (however fascinating that would be). My problem is with the practical side: just how much more should they earn? 5x? 10x? I don't know, but I know that 374x is too much.

We need a wage cap. Possibly along the lines of "the highest-paid employee can only make a maximum of X times the amount made by the lowest-paid". That's my opinion.

I kinda disagree. Tim is worth whatever he is worth on the free market. The government doesn't really have a right to intervene and say he deserves less.

 

[brando123b]

Meanwhile, Apple Store retail employees, who puts up with the most crap of anyone in the whole company, makes $16 per hour in San Francisco.

Most jobs compensate based on how many people could do said job. Being an Apple retail employee may be hard work, but it's not work that only a very few people can do. There are many more qualified to be an Apple retail employee than the CEO of Apple.

 

[69650]

I don't know if she gets credit, but buying something in an Apple store is insanely easy. I just walk in, there are tons of sales people all over, they are super friendly and fairly knowledgeable, they ring the thing up on their gadget, I tap my phone to Apple pay, the receipt is emailed to me, and I leave. In a busy store transactions can take two minutes. It is kind of crazy. I can't buy a pack of gum most days from the big chain grocery stores faster. It is definitely the best overall shopping experience outside of maybe the super high end fashion stores where they might bring me a beverage while I shop.

I'm sure some Apple Stores are better than others but my experience does not match yours. I usually have to wait anything from 5 to 25 minutes simply to get to speak to a sales person to process my sale because they're always so busy. I don't find shopping in the Apple Store to be a pleasant experience. The stores are far too hot with no air conditioning, they're usually over crowded and there is nowhere to sit down while you wait.
[doublepost=1452305732][/doublepost]

What really amused me is seeing "high qualified" people here criticize long time experienced high end executives. I'm sure any of you could do better, and I don't know why apple isn't hiring people from this thread.

You have absolutely no idea how well qualified anyone is on this forum.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Overpaid useless joker. Someone cast a resurrection spell and bring back the only true innovator of modern computing. He's rolling in his grave at what Tim's doing to Apple and Jony I've is doing to the GUI.

 

[TallManNY]

I'm sure some Apple Stores are better than others but my experience does not match yours. I usually have to wait anything from 5 to 25 minutes simply to get to speak to a sales person to process my sale because they're always so busy. I don't find shopping in the Apple Store to be a pleasant experience. The stores are far too hot with no air conditioning, they're usually over crowded and there is nowhere to sit down while you wait.
[doublepost=1452305732][/doublepost]

You have absolutely no idea how well qualified anyone is on this forum.

I often go to the location in Grand Central Station in New York City. Sometimes during lunch or some other working hour time. They have huge numbers of employees. Maybe there is a post work 5:30 to 6:30 crunch that they staff for which I never go there for. Or maybe as a flagship store they just keep it supper staffed. But there are always helpful greeters available. The place is super busy though and seems to do a brisk business. But if I want to buy an accessory all I have to do is walk in, grab the thing off the shelf, turn around and look for someone. Maybe I don't get someone immediately, but once I do it is just scan, tap and pay and then I stick the thing in my pocket and walk out.

But seriously, the ability of basically every employee to check me out from their iPhone in their hand without me having to wait in a line at the cash register is amazing.

 

[Nicky G]

I know Apple isn't the worst (although Steve Jobs, with his $1 salary and massive executive "gifts", including a Gulfstream Jet, was up there with the biggest corporate arseholes).

The problem I have is with the scale of pay. Sure, Tim Cook is high in the chain and should earn more, but 374x the average wage? Making more than the average American makes in a year every single day? That's absurd.

It's not the theory of it: sure, higher-ups can be paid more. We don't need total wage equality (however fascinating that would be). My problem is with the practical side: just how much more should they earn? 5x? 10x? I don't know, but I know that 374x is too much.

We need a wage cap. Possibly along the lines of "the highest-paid employee can only make a maximum of X times the amount made by the lowest-paid". That's my opinion.

First of all, income is a complete and total red herring in this discussion. Tax should be based on net wealth, not net income. I believe in heavy taxes for the well off. Based on net wealth. Vastly preferable IMHO to a wage cap.
[doublepost=1452321282][/doublepost]

I often go to the location in Grand Central Station in New York City. Sometimes during lunch or some other working hour time. They have huge numbers of employees. Maybe there is a post work 5:30 to 6:30 crunch that they staff for which I never go there for. Or maybe as a flagship store they just keep it supper staffed. But there are always helpful greeters available. The place is super busy though and seems to do a brisk business. But if I want to buy an accessory all I have to do is walk in, grab the thing off the shelf, turn around and look for someone. Maybe I don't get someone immediately, but once I do it is just scan, tap and pay and then I stick the thing in my pocket and walk out.

But seriously, the ability of basically every employee to check me out from their iPhone in their hand without me having to wait in a line at the cash register is amazing.

You know YOU can check yourself out, using your own phone, when buying accessories at the Apple Store, right? Using the app? You scan, pay via Apple Pay, and literally walk away with your item. No interaction with the staff even required.

 

[navaira]

Most jobs compensate based on how many people could do said job. Being an Apple retail employee may be hard work, but it's not work that only a very few people can do. There are many more qualified to be an Apple retail employee than the CEO of Apple.

Pff, this forum alone has at least 500 people who could do the CEO of Apple job. I mean just read the posts.

 

[springsup]

I kinda disagree. Tim is worth whatever he is worth on the free market. The government doesn't really have a right to intervene and say he deserves less.

That's not what it would say; it would say something along the lines of "the CEO of any company (whether that be Tim Cook, or anybody else), can only earn X times the compensation of the lowest-paid employee"

To that end, it's fair to point out that I said Tim Cook made 374x the average American salary, which is probably less than the average Apple employee salary. I don't know how that compares to the lowest-paid employee. That said, Tim Cook didn't just make $10m last year; he also has massive stock interests for last year's efforts which will effectively make him the best paid executive. The point is more general than just about Apple and Tim Cook, though.

If an executive is rewarded for good performance, there should be some legal recognition that it's a companywide effort, and they should all be rewarded (in a way that respects hierarchy to a reasonable ratio).

I'm not saying everybody can do what Tim Cook or any other CEO does, I'm just saying that in today's day and age, it seems unfair and unreasonable to say that anybody's labour is worth hundreds and hundreds of times another person's labour. We've had that system for a very long time, and it doesn't serve the ultimate goal of a democratic country, which is to ultimately raise the standard of living of as many people as possible.