Apple CEO Tim Cook Teases 'Great Innovation' in Product Pipeline on CNBC's Mad Money

[brendu]

2016: I'll give you that as the True Tone screen is clever and very nice.

2015: New product category for Apple only.

2015: They have copied the market with the new Apple TV, Amazon and Android offered apps before Apple as they knew it was where it's going, no innovation from Apple at all, just copying.

2015: Apple were beaten by Huawei with this technology, and I like most people forget it's there 90% of the time, not innovation in my mind when I forget it's there let alone not use it! It's most certainly NOT amazing.

2015: Apple copied the ultra book market with their update, smaller and thinner and lighter machines, but Apple ditched magsafe and ports to do that, you have to be a specific person or have specific needs to want one. It's not innovative to drop features to copy a market segment.

I would class the True Tone as innovative, I wouldn't class any of the above as amazing though.

You are ignoring the innovation in the products because they don't appeal to you. 3D Touch required an enormous amount of innovation in display technology. Just because it's not a feature you care about doesn't mean it isn't innovation. I love it and use it for trackpad cursor multiple times a day. I won't ever buy a phone without it now.

The MacBook has a fanless design with an entire system on a chip about the size of the iPhones. That takes innovation in microprocessor architecture. It also has an entirely new tiered battery design. Again innovation that hadn't been done before.

You not liking the overall end product doesn't mean it doesn't contain innovation.

 

[C DM]

No, the number 1 job (result) of the CEO of a publicly traded company is ROI to shareholders. On that, Cook is a disaster.

You state "You can't make money in return, right away, and at 100% market saturation upon release". You appear to make a statement to support your point of view that has not been made by others as I read through all these posts. Cook has been CEO for 5 years - stock performance has been a dog with him at the helm. He has wasted over $120,000,000,000 on buybacks and the stock continues to tank - hello.....

For some perspective - Apple cloud services are marginal. What if Cook had taken $12,000,000,000 and purchased Akamai in a hostile takeover with a 50% stock premium? That is what Apple should be doing along with a superior AI team and a network contract for streaming content, etc.

He has been wasting cash because he has no clue on what to do. Why does AAPL need to be propped up ?????

So a company makes tons and tons of money and more than any other company but the investors are still unhappy because of their own perceptions. Is the company failing by doing so well, or do people have their own perception (and many have none and just follow the perception of some others that the feel like following that day) no matter what the reality might actually be like?

http://amigobulls.com/articles/is-tim-cook-really-destroying-apple-stockholder-value

 

[6749974]

No, the number 1 job (result) of the CEO of a publicly traded company is ROI to shareholders.

Semantics.

On that, Cook is a disaster.

Stock has doubled under cook, tripled in 2015 but right now we're in a slide. Disaster? Carl Icahn just made $2 billion off Cook. Enjoy.

 

[C DM]

Semantics.



Stock has doubled under cook, tripled in 2015 but right now we're in a slide. Disaster? Carl Icahn just made $2 billion off Cook. Enjoy.

More money, more problems, right? Disaster!

 

[thermodynamic]

holy damage control mode, batman!

Precisely. After the stuck selloffs, plummets, etc...

The number of times he looked down or to the right as opposed to looking upper-left says a lot as well. Which was more about reflecting on internal emotions rather than analytical thought...

Cook's worried.

For many reasons. Even for a few that aren't instantly obvious.
[doublepost=1462319915][/doublepost]

No, the number 1 job (result) of the CEO of a publicly traded company is ROI to shareholders.

And shareholders want money for nothing, or have been too lackadaisical to actually look at "the big picture", what has happened over the years just to ensure their pieces of paper remain artificially inflated. Despite a number of market crashes and other problems, all while making statements about millennials and other shaped excuses that seem to be little more than propping up a system that has hurt far more people...

 

[MacAddict1978]

Absolutely agree...For how long does he hope to sell this speech about innovation, and all they do is recycle old ideas, without an original thought in the last five years

Maybe they can do something really different and give the mac a siri like assistant but give it a man's name and call it Sherlock. Oh wait.... that would be recycling 2 things....

 

[drumcat]

If you want to change perception, it can be done. You have to get back to doing the little things that "just work" and "make sense". http://matchavez.com/articles/low-hanging-apples/
[doublepost=1462321854][/doublepost]

I have the lowest end Macbook Pro from 5 years ago. It will run circles around the 2016 Macbook.

The top end Macbook Pro (not to mention the Mac Pro), from 7 years ago will run circles around most of the current lower end Macs.

And if you think all apps run "good enough" on essentially any Mac, you have to understand some people use their computers to do more than browse facebook. Of course, those people don't generally use macs anymore.

I'm still on my 2009 MBP. Why? Not compelled by the hardware updates. 4k screen would be appropriate, as would a TB SSD. Granted I've ditched my DVD for a second spinny drive, and I'm up to 8g ram, it's still questionable as to why I need more. I'd sure like a new battery, etc., but it needs to be worth the upgrade. Simply:

4k screen (3840x2160 or taller)
Audio without so much damn white noise
1TB SSD without huge markup

I am tired of having the same number of pixels in my phone. I'm tired of loud hiss and noisy fans. I'm tired of juggling drive space. And yet, an upgrade isn't that big of a deal after 7 years. It says a lot about the industry, but also it's a market well-ready to be hit hard with change.

 

[DevNull0]

If you want to change perception, it can be done. You have to get back to doing the little things that "just work" and "make sense". http://matchavez.com/articles/low-hanging-apples/
[doublepost=1462321854][/doublepost]


I'm still on my 2009 MBP. Why? Not compelled by the hardware updates. 4k screen would be appropriate, as would a TB SSD. Granted I've ditched my DVD for a second spinny drive, and I'm up to 8g ram, it's still questionable as to why I need more. I'd sure like a new battery, etc., but it needs to be worth the upgrade. Simply:

4k screen (3840x2160 or taller)
Audio without so much damn white noise
1TB SSD without huge markup

That's pretty much how I feel. As long as it has the cpu/gpu to really take advantage of the screen and not drop to 3 fps as soon as you try to do something demanding. I'd add 16 gig of ram without the huge markup as well. I'd like to keep my ethernet port and SD slot, but those aren't a huge deal.

As far as Just Work and Make Sense, i think that's where Apple is really losing it though. In the later versions of OSX it is incredibly hard to find a path to a file. Turning off the full URL by default in Safari is a bad joke. I remember in the 10.3 to 10.6 days everything was so intuitive and the machine was such a pleasure to use. Later OS versions seem designed to just piss the user off enough to switch to an iPad.

 

[fastasleep]

Well, I was thinking of desktops but
look at all these laptops with Skylake processors:
15 ultraportables,
21 13- to 13.9 inch ultrabooks,
14 14- to 14.9-inch ultrabooks,
27 15-inch (and bigger) Skylake laptops,
0 MacBook Pros.
http://www.ultrabookreview.com/8162-skylake-ultrabooks/

If you were talking about desktops, then you should know that the iMacs are on Skylake already.

Everyone expects the MacBook Pros are waiting on the Skylake H quad core with Iris Pro chipsets, which are not out yet... potentially along with the AMD Polaris dGPUs.

There are many variants on "Skylake", they're not all out yet.
[doublepost=1462328709][/doublepost]

£600 for something that does not last a day in battery power is a dud!

I put it on its charger every night with about 30-40% of its battery remaining. I get a day and a half to two days out of mine when I don't charge it.

 

[tw1ll]

Semantics.



Stock has doubled under cook, tripled in 2015 but right now we're in a slide. Disaster? Carl Icahn just made $2 billion off Cook. Enjoy.

Actually stock went down in calendar 2015 with a peak 29% higher than year low. Since 2011 the stock has had a couple of big peaks but overall since then is only a slightly better performer than the IT hardware sector or the NASDAQ 100.

 

[jacobj]

No one can control what Tim Cook says or doesn't say in an interview and or recorded conversation. Tim Cook is an engineer and Steve Jobs was a salesman, FACT. I, as a consumer pay for a result, not a product. I have been happy for one on my Apple Purchases, but I can speak for myself. Apple is chastised for its heritage and legacy over the years, up's and downs. Has Apple Had its shortcomings? Yes, they Have., but what BILLION dollar company hasn't!? You asking me for a retort on John Sculley compared to Tim Cook is Apples and Oranges. Different generation and time in Apple's growth, I could write a 10 page synopsis on that alone. That's like comparing the iPhone 6s to the iPhone 3GS, so where are we now? Where is Blackberry? Where is Nokia? Battleship sunk by Apple, no difference in the demise of Pebble, which they are on their way out. Apple's mainstream competitor is Samsung. Are their really any other competitors anymore? Or at least the public hears of? No. No one cares about the "Little Guy" anymore, its all about the latest and greatest.

I have been with Apple since day one, avid purchaser, stock/share holder, and of course, Apple supporter, and guess what? No Matter the leaps and bounds Apple defies, you, myself and every other Apple fanatic will support their products and growth, guaranteed. I agree they are a few steps behind the competition in innovation at times, but don't tell me Apple does not have something bigger, greater in which we all be "Wowed", and Macrumors will post an article on the success of Apple and rave about the positive reviews.

Can Apple be stagnant at times, Yes. Let me end by saying this, Apple is way smarter than you can comprehend, and if you think for a second that you can gauge their success rate by watching a 5 minute Jim Cramer Mad Money clip and or reading a "Posted Article of a Decline in Apple Watch or iPhone sale", then your narrow minded and ignorant. Checks and Balances!

Wow. A bit like TC you tell us all the points you could make, but you don't actually make anything with real substance. It's all rhetoric.

I think the point of this thread is that Apple has only ever been at the top of its form in SJ. You are right of course that every company is the same, in that it has highs and lows. When dipping into the lows though, you have to assess why and not have blind faith that all will be ok in the end. You reference Nokia, a company that dominated the market and yet did nothing new in the face of competition until it was too late. Let's not all be blind fanboys, accepting what we are given in the hope of a promise of greatness in the future.

Like you I have been a loyal apple user for many many years, but the time has come to move on. I will switch to Android this year, but happily return to the apple fold if they demonstrate innovation and not reactionary cloning.

I continue to use macs as I still prefer OSX. But Apples refresh cycle in that space has gone from bad to shocking.

 

[Dr.Chroma]

Wow. A bit like TC you tell us all the points you could make, but you don't actually make anything with real substance. It's all rhetoric.

I think the point of this thread is that Apple has only ever been at the top of its form in SJ. You are right of course that every company is the same, in that it has highs and lows. When dipping into the lows though, you have to assess why and not have blind faith that all will be ok in the end. You reference Nokia, a company that dominated the market and yet did nothing new in the face of competition until it was too late. Let's not all be blind fanboys, accepting what we are given in the hope of a promise of greatness in the future.

Like you I have been a loyal apple user for many many years, but the time has come to move on. I will switch to Android this year, but happily return to the apple fold if they demonstrate innovation and not reactionary cloning.

I continue to use macs as I still prefer OSX. But Apples refresh cycle in that space has gone from bad to shocking.

Umm...This a rumored website, what were you looking for? Direct answers or results of my previous post? Of course my answers are rhetoric, self-inflicted and opinionated. You want substance or end results? Then I suggest you contact Apple's Litigation Team. And furthermore, its posts like your that have me shaking my head. I am not a Fan-Boy, I am an avid supporter and philanthropist. Good for you your switching to Android, I hope it works best for you. Enjoy their bloated floatware and terrible UI.

One thing is for sure, Apple is heavily criticized, why? They crushed the competition and set the bar, now they are reporting their first loss since 2003. Now their being attacked for lack of, no innovation and menial upgrades. Yes, Apple needs to allow themselves to "Think Different" and create something to separate them from reaching distance. I'm not a glib person, but I can tell you Apple KNOWS they are smarter than any other Tech Company on the market. They need to depict this to their fans on a consistent basis.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Computers are first and foremost tools, but some people see them as fashion statements and regularly want a new look just for the new look's sake. And yes, these very people should buy a rose gold MacBook and shut up.

The impatience and non thinking of those fashion hounds always astounds me.

Would it really be better to have a pink hammer with a leather wrapped handle to hit a nail into the wall?
It's a spoiled view of what is important forgetting about basic needs. Too much money available I guess.

Once a product (any) is released one can only tinker (upgrade) so much until it is totally tricked out.
I don't welcome every change Apple makes (cutting ports), but their MBPs are still great products.

Other than form factor and color (doesn't do anything for performance) , speed, larger SSDs and screen quality their isn't much to improve.

Until there is FREE Wifi everywhere, I can't follow the move into the cloud, plus Apple has always been stingy with what they give you for the money.

 

[6749974]

Actually stock went down in calendar 2015 with a peak 29% higher than year low. Since 2011 the stock has had a couple of big peaks but overall since then is only a slightly better performer than the IT hardware sector or the NASDAQ 100.

He said Cook is a "disaster" for stock. I was disagreeing with reason.

Is your argument that stock under Cook isn't magical, and you're trying to bring the conversation down to a more practical sense? Because if so, I agree with you. I was just trying to counter-balance that Cook is bad for Apple. I don't equate him with Job's visionary archetype but he's top as fas as business management is concerned and has been great to stockholders:

"A lot of people complain that Tim Cook hoards cash, but then what did Steve Jobs do? Under Cook, Apple stock offers a reasonable dividend yield, which would have likely never been a thought under Jobs considering he had never paid out a regular cash dividend to investors. Apple's $200 billion capital return program is an example of how the company is returning capital to shareholders under Cook. Do you think shareholders would have the same level of benefits from dividends and buybacks under Jobs as they do under Cook? I don't think so. The chart below shows Apple stock performance since Tim Cook became CEO on August 24, 2011.

Many people might give credit to Jobs for the vision of the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, as well as his ability to market them, but that's simply not enough to stimulate continuous growth. Trying to chalk up the largest company to an idea and a good marketing plan is oversimplifying it. Under Cook revenue grew 116% from 2011 to 2015. And as competition in the smartphone industry increased, Cook was able to maintain perhaps the most impressive operating margin. Maybe he doesn't have the tech savvy imagination of a Jobs, but when we overlook the importance of manufacturing and supply chain management, we are overlooking how much of an impact Cook has had on Apple's top and bottom lines. Huge revenue growth and great net margins have been constant under Cook."

Source: http://amigobulls.com/articles/is-tim-cook-really-destroying-apple-stockholder-value
​

I'm making an evidence-based argument that Cook is not a disaster.

 

[tw1ll]

He said Cook is a "disaster" for stock. I was disagreeing with reason.

Is your argument that stock under Cook isn't magical, and you're trying to bring the conversation down to a more practical sense? Because if so, I agree with you. I was just trying to counter-balance that Cook is bad for Apple. I don't equate him with Job's visionary archetype but he's top as fas as business management is concerned and has been great to stockholders:

"A lot of people complain that Tim Cook hoards cash, but then what did Steve Jobs do? Under Cook, Apple stock offers a reasonable dividend yield, which would have likely never been a thought under Jobs considering he had never paid out a regular cash dividend to investors. Apple's $200 billion capital return program is an example of how the company is returning capital to shareholders under Cook. Do you think shareholders would have the same level of benefits from dividends and buybacks under Jobs as they do under Cook? I don't think so. The chart below shows Apple stock performance since Tim Cook became CEO on August 24, 2011.

Many people might give credit to Jobs for the vision of the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, as well as his ability to market them, but that's simply not enough to stimulate continuous growth. Trying to chalk up the largest company to an idea and a good marketing plan is oversimplifying it. Under Cook revenue grew 116% from 2011 to 2015. And as competition in the smartphone industry increased, Cook was able to maintain perhaps the most impressive operating margin. Maybe he doesn't have the tech savvy imagination of a Jobs, but when we overlook the importance of manufacturing and supply chain management, we are overlooking how much of an impact Cook has had on Apple's top and bottom lines. Huge revenue growth and great net margins have been constant under Cook."

Source: http://amigobulls.com/articles/is-tim-cook-really-destroying-apple-stockholder-value
​

I'm making an evidence-based argument that Cook is not a disaster.

Just wanted to get the other guys facts straight. Providing returns in line with the markets is not shabby given the size of (and expectations placed on) Apple. As an investor I'd like to see more visibilty of (& impact from) the next generation at Apple....the current team is starting to look jaded and their rhetoric about new products smacks of stewardship, not conquest. They are just not ambitious or agressive enough for me. Jobs may have been a bit of a megalomaniac but by 'eck did he have a positive impact and shake up a few industries.

 

[617aircav]

Yea right Mr Cook. You made a big deal about watch bands at your last event.

 

[Apple Corps]

So a company makes tons and tons of money and more than any other company but the investors are still unhappy because of their own perceptions. Is the company failing by doing so well, or do people have their own perception (and many have none and just follow the perception of some others that the feel like following that day) no matter what the reality might actually be like?

http://amigobulls.com/articles/is-tim-cook-really-destroying-apple-stockholder-value

It has nothing to do with investors perceptions - the FACTS are clear - look at AAPL history over Cook's tenure as CEO.

 

[C DM]

It has nothing to do with investors perceptions - the FACTS are clear - look at AAPL history over Cook's tenure as CEO.

The stock went up (among other things mentioned in the earlier linked article).

 

[Apple Corps]

He said Cook is a "disaster" for stock. I was disagreeing with reason.

Is your argument that stock under Cook isn't magical, and you're trying to bring the conversation down to a more practical sense? Because if so, I agree with you. I was just trying to counter-balance that Cook is bad for Apple. I don't equate him with Job's visionary archetype but he's top as fas as business management is concerned and has been great to stockholders:

"A lot of people complain that Tim Cook hoards cash, but then what did Steve Jobs do? Under Cook, Apple stock offers a reasonable dividend yield, which would have likely never been a thought under Jobs considering he had never paid out a regular cash dividend to investors. Apple's $200 billion capital return program is an example of how the company is returning capital to shareholders under Cook. Do you think shareholders would have the same level of benefits from dividends and buybacks under Jobs as they do under Cook? I don't think so. The chart below shows Apple stock performance since Tim Cook became CEO on August 24, 2011.

Many people might give credit to Jobs for the vision of the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, as well as his ability to market them, but that's simply not enough to stimulate continuous growth. Trying to chalk up the largest company to an idea and a good marketing plan is oversimplifying it. Under Cook revenue grew 116% from 2011 to 2015. And as competition in the smartphone industry increased, Cook was able to maintain perhaps the most impressive operating margin. Maybe he doesn't have the tech savvy imagination of a Jobs, but when we overlook the importance of manufacturing and supply chain management, we are overlooking how much of an impact Cook has had on Apple's top and bottom lines. Huge revenue growth and great net margins have been constant under Cook."

Source: http://amigobulls.com/articles/is-tim-cook-really-destroying-apple-stockholder-value
​

I'm making an evidence-based argument that Cook is not a disaster.

You clearly do not have a grasp on investing. Your comment that I highlighted in red is most telling. The role of the CEO is ROI - Return on Investment. That is vastly different than Return of Investment. The investing is a profit on your investment in AAPL NOT Apple buying your investment back from you at depressed market prices.
[doublepost=1462375335][/doublepost]

The stock went up (among other things mentioned in the earlier linked article).

And this morning the stock is down - so...?? Investing is not about day to day prices - that is trading.

I do not need multiple paragraphs of chatter to make the point. A $100,000 investment in AAPL 4 years ago is worth about $100,000 today - with a "sizzling" 2% dividend per year. Yet - and this is the big point - Apple is sitting on $230,000,000,000 in cash - has wasted $130,000,000,000 in propping up the stock with buybacks (HAS NOT WORKED), and virtually no ROI to investors.

There....

 

[C DM]

You clearly do not have a grasp on investing. Your comment that I highlighted in red is most telling. The role of the CEO is ROI - Return on Investment. That is vastly different than Return of Investment. The investing is a profit on your investment in AAPL NOT Apple buying your investment back from you at depressed market prices.
[doublepost=1462375335][/doublepost]

And this morning the stock is down - so...?? Investing is not about day to day prices - that is trading.

I do not need multiple paragraphs of chatter to make the point. A $100,000 investment in AAPL 4 years ago is worth about $100,000 today - with a "sizzling" 2% dividend per year. Yet - and this is the big point - Apple is sitting on $230,000,000,000 in cash - has wasted $130,000,000,000 in propping up the stock with buybacks (HAS NOT WORKED), and virtually no ROI to investors.

There....

This morning the stock is down? Compared to what, to when Cook took over? Talk about not talking about day to day prices. There...indeed.

 

[6749974]

Just wanted to get the other guys facts straight. Providing returns in line with the markets is not shabby given the size of (and expectations placed on) Apple. As an investor I'd like to see more visibilty of (& impact from) the next generation at Apple....the current team is starting to look jaded and their rhetoric about new products smacks of stewardship, not conquest. They are just not ambitious or agressive enough for me. Jobs may have been a bit of a megalomaniac but by 'eck did he have a positive impact and shake up a few industries.

I agree completely with every point you make.
[doublepost=1462377740][/doublepost]

You clearly do not have a grasp on investing. Your comment that I highlighted in red is most telling. The role of the CEO is ROI - Return on Investment. That is vastly different than Return of Investment. The investing is a profit on your investment in AAPL NOT Apple buying your investment back from you at depressed market prices.
[doublepost=1462375335][/doublepost]

And this morning the stock is down - so...?? Investing is not about day to day prices - that is trading.

I do not need multiple paragraphs of chatter to make the point. A $100,000 investment in AAPL 4 years ago is worth about $100,000 today - with a "sizzling" 2% dividend per year. Yet - and this is the big point - Apple is sitting on $230,000,000,000 in cash - has wasted $130,000,000,000 in propping up the stock with buybacks (HAS NOT WORKED), and virtually no ROI to investors.

There....

Semantics.

Also, please understand, this whole thing is relative to what personal strategy, as an investor you want.

Apple is a big company now. Has been for years. You're not gonna get the growth in stock from a new player who begins to dominate things. So Apple makes a good long term stock.

Zoom out to 5+ years and you'll see that.

Also, the game is buy low sell high. So that's what you should do. That's what Ichan did. He bought at a price, said Apple is awesome! Everyone followed, and he sold his stock, yelling "Suckers!" but politely.

Return ON investment is up to the smarts of the investor. Are you a Buffet type in for the long, big ship play? Or Icahn for the active meddler? Or did you buy at a high price and now you're upset it hasn't gone back up to where you bought?

I don't know your perspective and your position. What that is dictates whether or not you love Cook or hate him.

Agree or disagree, but this is the tech industry and Apple has been here all along. You want maybe a crazy return? You have to look for a crazy bet. Apple is steady growth, which is boring. Unless you play Apple month to month. In which case stay sharp. Or else you'll blame Cook for your bad play.

 

[617aircav]

Apple has taken its loyal base for granted. They think they can just throw a gimped product out there and their fans will buy. In what world is it one to release a newer iPad Pro, try and market it it pc owners and put only 2gb of ram in. Only in apples world. Competition is better now that 5 years ago. Apples build quality has been matched by more than a few manufactures, so it's less of a selling point than it used to be. Could you imagine the sales of the new MacBook if it was just a fraction heavier and thicker, but included a i5 and more than one port.

 

[NT1440]

Apple has taken its loyal base for granted. They think they can just throw a gimped product out there and their fans will buy. In what world is it one to release a newer iPad Pro, try and market it it pc owners and put only 2gb of ram in. Only in apples world. Competition is better now that 5 years ago. Apples build quality has been matched by more than a few manufactures, so it's less of a selling point than it used to be. Could you imagine the sales of the new MacBook if it was just a fraction heavier and thicker, but included a i5 and more than one port.

Nope.

Most consumers couldn't tell an i5 from a toaster.

 

[617aircav]

Nope.

Most consumers couldn't tell an i5 from a toaster.

True, but millions can.

 

[Apple Corps]

This morning the stock is down? Compared to what, to when Cook took over? Talk about not talking about day to day prices. There...indeed.

Yes - we are seeing poor stock performance that Cook owns. 5 years in he out of Steve's shadow and out of Steve's pipeline. How is Cook doing - Wall Street / investors have spoken loudly - NO CONFIDENCE in Cook.

There.....