Apple CEO Tim Cook to Speak With Jim Cramer on CNBC's Mad Money Tonight

[convergent]

View attachment 698353 View attachment 698354 View attachment 698355

This is such a good graphic.

Sure the company is generating a lot of cash. There was a time when every Friday IBM had a parking lot full of hundreds of tractor trailers queued to pickup multi-million dollar mainframes that they sold like hotcakes. Technology companies should be assessed on their future. IBM depended too much on one product and it ran them into the ground.

Timmy keeps talking about the pipeline... and I think he needs some iDrano to unclog that pipe. Or its just smoke and mirrors. I'm done with hearing "its the thinnest abcd we've ever made" or watching a keynote and having them talk about how they applied glossy black paint for a significant part of the presentation. I'm also not interested in what political agenda Timmy wants to get behind. And I'm definitely not interested in hearing about their huge spaceship campus.

I think Apple has become fat dumb and happy, as the saying goes, and they are now such a supply chain machine for iPhones that nothing else matters. And even at that, they've not produced anything earth shattering lately with that product either. This is a technology company that has a quarter trillion dollars in cash and can't find anything to do with it to advance technology and do better with it sitting in an investment portfolio. That's pretty sad that the largest tech company can't find anything to invest in with all that money.

 

[BigHonkingDeal]

Jim Cramer, the same guy that urged everyone to buy Investment Bank stocks right before all the investment banks went bankrupt.

It amazes me that CNBC still employs this tool. It just shows me that CNBC has nothing worth watching.

This man lost all credibility a long time ago.....

 

[44267547]

You can like Cook. That's fine. He's done no harm to AAPL stock for sure. But that wasn't the crux of what you wrote about. You explicitly said Cook did more for Apple than Jobs did. OK -- exactly how? What has he done to take Apple to the, excuse the cliche, "next level." Apple is definetly a wealthier company now than 5 years ago --- no way to prove Apple wouldn't have these cash reserves were Jobs still around either. So fundamentally what has Cook done that exceeds everything Jobs ever did in terms of product development and being a game changer?

First, it's not about my preference of who I "Like." Both Cook and Jobs have different traits that I appreciate about both of them. I don't necessarily think it's about Cook exceedingly making the company a better place without Jobs. More so they have expanded off what Jobs created.

That said, In your first post you have examples of How Jobs redefined Apple through the expansion of various products and services, which is all true and he set the tone for Apple from That point forward. But you, I and no one else could truly predict Apple's financial state or current product line IF Jobs were here today. I Don't disagree with your sentiments what Jobs has accomplished, but we are talking all past tense.

However, where Cook has teetered Apple is iPhone sales are the strongest they have ever been, where 800,000 iPhones are manufactured every day, which continues to absorb the majority of their net revenue.

Cook introduced the AirPods which were brilliant, aside from the delayed launch, which are still back ordered and have massive potential.

The Apple Watch, easily the best accessory to the iPhone, and most may not agree, but the watchbands are huge absorption for Apple to continue to maximize profit, which is a Money maker alone.

And yes I'm going to make a point about the beats acquisition, but it still was a smart decision, especially with the music industry and Apple Music.

The iPhone SE in the 2017 iPad we are also excellent moves to make an affordable products that introduces those who wanted a smaller iPhone and iPad with Apple's ecosystem, which Cook saw this as a way to have entry level products to draw in more of a demographic .

Also cooks investment into green and renewable energy, which is up 75%, from where it was at 35% with in the last two years ago.

Cook has figured out a way to maximize profit and generate a huge amount of cash and AAPL stock is healthy at being up at 27% this year. Regardless if you disagree with me, these are ways Cook has put Apple in a profitable position . Both CEO's have contributed to Apple in different ways.

It started with Jobs, but Apple isn't the company they were 20 years ago, some may agree with the changes and other do not. I see both sides though.

 

[macUser2007]

...
And yes I'm going to make a point about the beats acquisition, but it still was a smart decision, especially with the music industry and Apple Music.
....

Ah, yes. Beats Music became Apple Music. True dat.

But you seem to forget that a year earlier, Beats paid $15 million for MOG, which then they renamed, stripped off its Pandora-like radio station feature and then sold to Tim for $3+ billion, together with the spiraling down hardware business.

Milking an existing product to make short-term shareholders happy and ingratiating oneself to Board members is certainly a way to run a tech company for a bit. It is great for Cook and some shareholders. But in the long run, it's bad for the company and for consumers.

 

[amegicfox]

when does this guy work ?
always giving interviews and taking selfies

Tim go back to Cupertino and update the Mac mini, iMac, Mac pro and all the Apple software which is outdated and slow

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

It was a short vid posted.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

However, where Cook has teetered Apple is iPhone sales are the strongest they have ever been, where 800,000 iPhones are manufactured every day, which continues to absorb the majority of their net revenue.

Cook introduced the AirPods which were brilliant, aside from the delayed launch, which are still back ordered and have massive potential.

The Apple Watch, easily the best accessory to the iPhone, and most may not agree, but the watchbands are huge absorption for Apple to continue to maximize profit, which is a Money maker alone.

And yes I'm going to make a point about the beats acquisition, but it still was a smart decision, especially with the music industry and Apple Music.

The iPhone SE in the 2017 iPad we are also excellent moves to make an affordable products that introduces those who wanted a smaller iPhone and iPad with Apple's ecosystem, which Cook saw this as a way to have entry level products to draw in more of a demographic .

Also cooks investment into green and renewable energy, which is up 75%, from where it was at 35% with in the last two years ago.

Cook has figured out a way to maximize profit and generate a huge amount of cash and AAPL stock is healthy at being up at 27% this year. Regardless if you disagree with me, these are ways Cook has put Apple in a profitable position . Both CEO's have contributed to Apple in different ways.

It started with Jobs, but Apple isn't the company they were 20 years ago, some may agree with the changes and other do not. I see both sides though.

I'll take this as your admission that Cook's work at Apple in no way surpasses Jobs accomplishments, even just Jobs first 5 years -- you pick which tenure. Everything you listed above as Cook accomplishments are derivatives or accessories to what Jobs developed. Again, Apple does not exist in 2017 if Jobs had not come back onboard in 1997 and redefined the company and the whole electronics industry and Tim Cook today is an anonymous exec at HP or IBM today. So it's factually incorrect to suggest Cook has done more at Apple than Steve Jobs.

 

[LizKat]

Everything you listed above as Cook accomplishments are derivatives or accessories to what Jobs developed.

Everything he mentioned is nonetheless an accomplishment with Tim Cook at the helm. A good idea offered up by one CEO can be let to wither on the vine by the next, or else developed further if a way to take it forward seems feasible.

For instance, it takes some brass to sell in the idea of "sustainable" to this bottom-line-obsessed financial system we live in, yet Cook has managed to do that anyway, to not only his credit and that of Apple, but to approval by shareholders and customers who take a longer view than that of next quarter's profits.

It also takes some fortitude to resist calls for drifting down the "sell more for less" path to items on the cheap side of electronics. Cook's crew has listened to calls for different models inside a product line, for instance the iPhone SE, but not to those clamoring for Apple to make a supercheap cellphone or laptop for pitching to the low end of those markets.

In short, the guy and the people working for him are navigating treacherous waters successfully. It doesn't mean they don't have problems. Steve Jobs' Apple would have those problems now as well. Scaling up to meet demand for product with finicky assembly routines is difficult. QA needs attention. Meanwhile the very success of their products causes demands for hardware updates that take time to be done right. We ask the impossible of this company sometimes without seeming to realize it: make it have new features, be super-reliable, don't charge so much, roll it out yesterday! Oh, and don't forget to keep an eye on Wall Street and on the antics of a government looking to score political points by how it deals with corporations and taxes, etc. etc.

Cook's paycheck (and that of Jobs before him) is about juggling Apple's affairs inside and outside the company -- dealing with designers, engineers, marketers, suppliers, consumers, tech lobby to governments around the world-- while bringing in a bottom line that so far manages to satisfy those masters of the universe in the financial district. When one of us can assure Apple's board of directors that we can do a much much better job than Tim Cook, I'm sure that board will leap at the chance to let us prove it. There are doubtless days Cook would love to hand the job over to the nearest warm body, but he's surely aware the job is thankless and that his fat pay is in lieu of applause.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Everything he mentioned is nonetheless an accomplishment with Tim Cook at the helm.

Yes, I said as much. I think you got into the conversation at the back end of it though. The impetus for the conversation was that OP stated that Cooks accomplishments at Apple exceed Jobs. That is false and provably so.

 

[LizKat]

Yes, I said as much. I think you got into the conversation at the back end of it though. The impetus for the conversation was that OP stated that Cooks accomplishments at Apple exceed Jobs. That is false and provably so.

I guess I'm focused on the unsuitability of making the comparison. And so end up saying Tim Cook's doing a good job, as did Steve Jobs in his time. The factors involved in comparing the two men's accomplishments make for measuring what's going on in a bowl of jelly, no? Nothing holds still out there in the world while one man takes the helm from another in a particular company. Not only that, we have no idea what's on the drawing board, what's half-ready to move from prototype to assembly. And we are never sure when the planet will get off its instant gratification kick and get back to realizing that even though we've been able to send information around the world in seconds for decades now, it takes time to think about the next step in development of personal computing technology.

But I'll grant you it's possible to make comparisons of CEOs in general. Take John Sculley. please....

But Cook is no Sculley, even if some insist that Cook is also nowhere near what Steve Jobs was. otoh Apple might not be around were it not for at least some of Sculley's attentions in the ten years he led Apple before some say Steve Jobs returned to save Apple from death by beige box. Sculley at one point said he thought one of the worst mistakes he made was going with the PowerPC architecture rather than the Intel chip but plenty of Apple aficionados acquired that status during the heyday of the much later G4 machines that still relied on an evolved PowerPC chip. Bottom line, beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. Another bottom line: we all have somewhat selective memories!

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Bottom line, beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. Another bottom line: we all have somewhat selective memories!

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder when you are talking about subjective things. One's accomplishments can be judged quite objectively via metrics such as named in patents that are or were used, product sales volume and grow, impact on company prestige; industry; society, etc. The Yankees are the most successful baseball organization in MLB history. Like the team or not it can't be argued - trophies prove it. That is objective.

Similarly, Job's impact is documented fact by numbers and a sociological review of life before and after the major products and services he shepherded. Jobs is HOF. Cook has yet to prove he is in that league. That's not my opinion, it's fact. No product or service Apple has introduced in the past 5 years has changed the way society does things or even the electronics industry in any way like what Jobs did.

This is not to say anything negative about Cook, it's to say he has yet to gain membership in the HOF.

 

[Jefe's MacAir]

what about there "disapointing" iPhone sales last quarter?

In the last year AAPL has gained 48%. Who cares?

Honestly, if you didn't see it coming, you weren't paying attention. The iPhone 7 is nothing more than a iPhone 6ss. Anyone with a 6 or 6s had very little motive to upgrade. It should've been expected and I'm sure Apple understood this.

Banking on the iPhone 8/Edition/X to demolish all previous iPhone sales. We will see. Buy, buy, buy.

 

[vpro]

well, that was pointless garbage tv LOL
he says "especially in China because they expect the latest and greatest" but then continues "we're trying to determine why previous gen iPhones are selling so well".
what the what? you just answered your own question bud.
if it's China, it means they've already successfully made enough replicas of "previous gens" for fractions of Apple prices and it's all a status symbol anyways with the latest brands. it's a throw-away culture over there.

 

[Breaking Good]

Actually Cramer is good to watch. For us normal people, it is the only way to see how retail Wall Street advisors actually work. Understanding that is fundamental to investing in todays market. While its true that most people that rely on retail wall street investment advise lose in the short run, it does explain certain a lot of things that are done to generate commissions. But, yeh, to follow religiously is a good way to part with a lot of money as Cramer is a self fulfilling way for Cramer to make money.

nt5672 - could you expand on this some more? You seem to be one of the few people on this forum that actually has some understanding of how financial markets (investing) actually works. Thanks.

 

[nt5672]

nt5672 - could you expand on this some more? You seem to be one of the few people on this forum that actually has some understanding of how financial markets (investing) actually works. Thanks.

Sure, Cramer has a lot of buddies in Wall Street and he was a huge hedge fund manager for years. They all travel and buy/sell in packs. When the wall street pack changes direction, it can swamp a retail investor that is not aware of the turn. When the pack changes direction that does not mean it is a good, or that they will make money, it only means that if you are a hedge fund trader and travel with the pack your Hedge Fund manager will not be so quick to fire you if you lose money.

Fundamentals are not the leading factor they were for years, there are still important but the Wall Street fad is the most important now. That fad is determined by Hedge Fund managers and computer algorithms, both of which can relieve the retail investor of a lot of money. They both can drive the stock down to where a retail investor is forced to sell because they are uncomfortable facing any more losses. In fact, computer algorithms are specifically designed to do this. The big hedge funds routinely get together and do this. When the stock is driven down, the professionals then buy it back at the bargain price. Guaranteed profits!

As an investor you need to be able to spot computer manipulation of a stock and be aware of the current Wall Street fad. Listening to how Cramer picks stocks can tell you a lot about the current Wall Street fad. Listen to the commentary about the stocks, not which stocks he picks and you will learn a lot about how Wall Street is picking stocks right now and how advisors are telling people to pick stocks. Knowing what other people are doing can be an important PART of an investing strategy.

Cramer gets this right as shown by the performance of his fund (Action Alerts PLUS portfolio) that is published (not Mad Money). The problem is that as soon as he and all his buddies buy the stock (and thereby run it up) then a bunch of followers buy the stock, there is no upside for anyone that has to wait until they get home from work, or break from a meeting to follow his advise.

Anyway if you listen carefully, Cramer revels inside practices all the time. As a retail investor this is important to know as long as you do not follow blindly.

 

[Gudi]

Only an idiot would speak with Jim Cramer, then again who says Tim Cook isn't one?