Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The short-term gain of cheap labor and the lack of labor rights/laws in China was too much for TC (and other tech companies) to resist.
You are forgetting that the Chinese government was also willing to setup an entire city wholly dedicated to the assembly of iPhones. It's not just the low wages and perceived lack of labour rights, but also the supply chain and infrastructure there that made it possible for Apple to churn out hundreds of millions of iPhones every year and ship them around the world.

Simply put, no other country possessed the capability, or the willingness to commit to the extent that the Chinese government has.

Or to put it bluntly, Apple would never have grown to the size they are today if they had chosen to not manufacture in China. Their products would have cost way more, be even more supply-constrained, and I fail to see how that is a net benefit for any of us who, prior to the pandemic, were already complaining of apple products being expensive.

It's still worth it overall.
 
In response to some of the comments I've read, and to be clear, the compensation reduction referred to in this proxy didn't just happen. The decision was made some time ago and we were aware of it back in September when a Form 4 was filed detailing Mr. Cook's annual RSU grant.
 
Are we supposed to feel sorry for him?
No, you're supposed to feel sorry for Apple employees. This is Apple's way of saying that instead of massive layoffs (like every other tech company is doing) for their employees, Apple isn't going to be giving out any fat bonuses, raises or inflated salaries for a while. With all their cash, it would be terrible optics for Apple to let thousands of employees go and it would also scare the entire US economy into a recession (if it isn't already).
 
A $1 salary with no other compensation except for some free devices would be a more meaningful gesture. He already has more money than he will ever spend in his remaining time. At this level these people aren’t driven by money anyway.
Cook already pledged to give it all away to charity before he dies.

 
Apple and TC chose short-term gains by taking advantage of the cheap labor in China rather than moving and investing elsewhere.

Apple is trying to move elsewhere now, but if TC was the supply chain wizard that people pretend he is, Apple would have done this a long time ago, and the supply chain nightmare would just be a speed bump for them.

No. Apple chose to make outstanding phones and other products its customers would want and at prices people could afford.

And at the time, inexpensive high quality manufacturing in required volumes (600,000+ iPhones every day of the year, which could be instantly increased/decreased on market demand) where China was the only option available.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how these rich CEO’s spend their free time? Johnny Ive has pretty nice house in Nancy Pelosi’s neighbor but Tim looks to be like a regular guy, you won’t see him driving a Lambo Urus like those fake people pretending to be rich in L.A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1Peace and Solomani
Steve Jobs got much less for doing much more.
"Nearly $140 million dollars was arguably a small sum for Steve Jobs—who had an estimated $10.2 billion net worth before his death—to invest on a yacht "
 
Last edited:
I wonder how these rich CEO’s spend their free time? Johnny Ive has pretty nice house in Nancy Pelosi’s neighbor but Tim looks to be like a regular guy, you won’t see him driving a Lambo Urus like those fake people pretending to be rich in L.A.

He is. Modest home. Walks around in his downtown without an entourage. Sometimes he's at Starbucks with his iPad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solomani
The App store should take a paycut. 30% for server hosting and "quality checks" is just immoral.
Companies put apps in the App Store for the same reason they buy their own brand as a keyword on Google. Potential customers go looking for your service in the App Store, and if you aren't there then some other companies will happily try to take their money instead.

And if you acquire a potential customer via the App Store, Apple wants their cut. They take their cut through initial purchase and in-app purchase revenue. They have rules to keep you from cutting them out.

Apple has never tried to justify 30% as 'just' for hosting and quality checks. This would obviously be disconnected, because many of the companies which cause the biggest hosting and quality check headaches (*cough* Facebook) currently give Apple 30% of zero.

Likewise, Apple isn't "just" adding ads to the store for the ad revenue, directly. It is because again, companies are looking for potential customers to bring in additional opportunities to make bank, and are willing to spend money with Apple to make it happen.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.