You know what’s actually unimaginable? The iPhones and AirPods made by slave labor in Xinjiang, China. Maybe Tim could use all of that “responsibility” to look into the situation?
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 CEO Tim Cook Earns Spot on TIME's List of 100 Most Influential People of 2022
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ages ago? How about less than a month ago. In any case, what's your conclusion/assessment after reading and soaking in the story?
Whose that? Between Chinese factories being shut down causing massive shortages, and the War in Ukraine causing transport/power/fuel problems for the EU and elsewhere. Anyone maintaining profitability with available manufacturing issues with a company these days as a CEO should be looked at positively.
Although Apple has performed very well re: operations under Cook, few if any talk about the level of stock buy backs he has authored (likely #1).
Cook has authorized nearly $1Trillion in buy backs. During his run to becoming a billionaire one might argue that buy backs had more impact on Apple's stock price vs. any other factor. Note that this is **very** common CEO behavior for meeting one's stock performance objectives thereby adding 10's or 100's of millions to one's worth
One thing that separates Steve Jobs from most if not all CEO is his disdain for this type of stock price manipulation. One might argue that SJ ignored all pure financial means to raise stock price. His only focus was "better products = higher share price".
I like Tim. I hope he goes into politics (the "anti-Carly"). What might have have been had ~$1T in buy back been invested in products by SJ ???
Personally: I hope, **hope** that at some point buy backs are illegal. If you cannot reinvest at an adequate ROI then pay dividends. (Yeah, tilting at windmills there.)
Last edited:
It’s really not difficult to show respect. Should come naturally…
When companies are well off, it's not at all uncommon for them to buy back their stocks, as such there is no basis for it being bad for the company and its investors. Just having all the monetary surplus around can be used for other things than buying companies.
Why Do Companies Buy Back Stock?
1. Boost Undervalued Shares
2. Enhance Shareholder Value By Providing Cash Distribution
3. Increase Earnings Per Share (EPS)
4. Reduce Cash Outflow
5. Make Changes in Capital Structure
6. Provide Stock Buyback Programs to Shareholders
Last edited:
Yes! 1000 times yes! Buybacks only help Wall St and strangle the company and its employees. That $1T could easily go to better salaries and benefits for people helping them foster more talent.
The true core principle at Apple was make the best thing there is. Right now, it's that plus what Tim does... soon, just the stock manipulation.
Did you fail to note that Laurene Powell Jobs (Steve Jobs Wife), who authored the Time article portion about Tim Cook which celebrated his tenure as Apple's CEO and the "compassion and discipline" he shows as the head of the company?
An extremely accomplished businessman and doubtless very influential in his field, but he doesn't inspire me as a customer. I never really get the feeling he's passionate about anything other than being an accomplished businessman.
Agreed, those legislations can be challenged and I bet lots of players will.
He did very well in the eyes of the shareholders. And for the general public, his most recent feat was reinvigorating the Mac, a multi year process that culminated brilliantly.
I see him being around until launch of not only the VR glasses but especially the car, which could be his final big delivery.
I see him being around until launch of not only the VR glasses but especially the car, which could be his final big delivery.
sour grapes much? Time publishes this list every year around this time, looking back the last 12 months.
No, I just don’t agree. I find him to be dishonest, dispassionate and hypocritical.
Buybacks are just dividends with no/lower taxes.....
Spending 1T just for spending 1T is a very bad idea.
Sure some of it could have gone to more R&D or fixing some issues within the whole business just not on that scale.
So either give it to charity, which could be legally dubious due to them having to be shareholder value 1st by law, or give it back to the shareholder in one way or the other.
You have WWDC 2022 coming up shortly with rumors of real multitasking in iOS 16 and a lot more exclusive features created for M1 Macs. See if any of that excites you a bit more when he gives the keynote.
You don't have to spend $1T. But using it just to line their (executives) pockets is a why several companies later have issues.
Has he gone on record expressing that type of interest? Many good designers have little interest in leaving designing.
It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings.
And luckily she has an Apple Watch and a subscription to Fitness+, so she's never going to get fat. ?
So is this factual or maybe heavily anecdotal and in your opinion?
Actually, many big companies did great the past 2 years. Much better than Apple, even.