• Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
52,945
14,686
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

Apple today announced that it has filed an amended Form 10-Q with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, correcting errors in the reported vote totals for shareholder-submitted proposals at its most recent annual shareholder meeting.
Last week's filing incorrectly reported the voting percentages for shareholder-submitted proposals because abstentions were counted as "No" votes. Very shortly after the original filing, the company learned that these votes had been incorrectly tallied and an internal investigation confirmed the mistake was due to human error, which Apple regrets. Today's amendment correctly reports the voting results.
The correction affected the outcome of one shareholder-submitted proposal, known as "Say on Pay," which successfully passed with approximately 51.63% of votes cast under corrected counting procedures.
As a result of the corrected vote count, Shareholder Proposal No. 5 Regarding Advisory Vote on Compensation, known as "Say on Pay," was approved with a majority of votes cast. The Compensation Committee of Apple's Board of Directors has been closely following the Say on Pay issue, and anticipates that new laws or regulations will require some form of Say on Pay vote at all public companies in the near future. Even if that does not occur, Apple is committed to implementing an advisory Say on Pay vote next year.
As noted in shareholder materials for the annual meeting, the "Say on Pay" proposal, will allow shareholders to cast advisory votes regarding compensation for Apple's senior management at each annual meeting. The referendums would be non-binding, but would allow shareholders a greater voice in communicating with Apple management. Apple had formally opposed the proposal as an ineffective means of offering shareholder input.

Executive compensation has become a popular topic among shareholders throughout the corporate world, with several countries recently passing laws requiring such opportunities for shareholders and the U.S. considering similar legislation.

Article Link: Apple Corrects 10-Q SEC Filing, Announces Shareholder Approval of 'Say on Pay' Proposal
 

hitekalex

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2008
1,624
0
Chicago, USA
10-Q SEC filing has been corrected?? You don't say.. When did the corporate process minutiae become worthy of 1st page news?
 
Comment

amk29j

macrumors newbie
May 7, 2007
21
1
Say on Pay is actually a very big deal.

It might be a big deal for a shareholder, but it's not a big deal to the average Apple consumer who is mostly following their product line. This is really not relevant to me and probably most people. It's not worthy for Page 1.
 
Comment

Le Big Mac

macrumors 68030
Jan 7, 2003
2,685
226
Washington, DC
Say on Pay is actually a very big deal.

Or at least its ratification by shareholders is.

I had several proxies this year with the proposal, all had management against and at least one noted that similar proposals were on lots of corporate annual agendas.
 
Comment

michael.lauden

macrumors 68020
Dec 25, 2008
2,326
1
It might be a big deal for a shareholder, but it's not a big deal to the average Apple consumer who is mostly following their product line. This is really not relevant to me and probably most people. It's not worthy for Page 1.

i'd probably agree - but this is probably a bigger deal for Apple - which is what MacRumors covers
 
Comment

anubis

macrumors 6502a
Feb 7, 2003
937
50
Not sure why this is front page news... a slight error in a 10-Q filing that has very little to no impact on Apple, its day to day operations, and most importantly, the Macrumors community
 
Comment

jbernie

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2005
927
11
Denver, CO
Not the end of the world but newsworthy regardless given the backlash against director pay & incentives at many large companies of late.

Not aware of there being a general backlash against the compensation given to Apple's board members but the shareholder vote can remind the board of who keeps them there should they change their compensation to something more substational and unwarrented as viewed by the shareholders.
 
Comment

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,930
1,239
Washington DC
It might be a big deal for a shareholder, but it's not a big deal to the average Apple consumer who is mostly following their product line. This is really not relevant to me and probably most people. It's not worthy for Page 1.

I'm so sorry that the news about Quicktime uploading directly to Youtube was pushed down the front page.

Surely consumers will be lost and hopeless without that critical news being availalbe without scrolling!
 
Comment

mdriftmeyer

macrumors 68040
Feb 2, 2004
3,349
1,059
Pacific Northwest
It might be a big deal for a shareholder, but it's not a big deal to the average Apple consumer who is mostly following their product line. This is really not relevant to me and probably most people. It's not worthy for Page 1.

Create your own news site and dictate what is or is not news worthy for the top page.
 
Comment

Le Big Mac

macrumors 68030
Jan 7, 2003
2,685
226
Washington, DC
i'd probably agree - but this is probably a bigger deal for Apple - which is what MacRumors covers

And Steve Jobs is probably thinking "for most companies, this would be no good, but I'm pretty sure the shareholders will vote me even more money than I'd feel comfortable getting from the board. Sweet."
 
Comment

DELLsFan

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2009
826
0
Not the end of the world but newsworthy regardless given the backlash against director pay & incentives at many large companies of late.

Not aware of there being a general backlash against the compensation given to Apple's board members but the shareholder vote can remind the board of who keeps them there should they change their compensation to something more substational and unwarrented as viewed by the shareholders.

Compensation to the Apple Board of directors would never be publicly questioned - especially when the company is doing so well and shareholders continue to receive profit.

Still, who wouldn't be curious to know what Apple was paying Albert Gore, Jr. for doing ... what exactly? :confused:
 
Comment

MattInOz

macrumors 68030
Jan 19, 2006
2,760
0
Sydney
And Steve Jobs is probably thinking "for most companies, this would be no good, but I'm pretty sure the shareholders will vote me even more money than I'd feel comfortable getting from the board. Sweet."

Yep Steve wage is safe.
They can't pay him less than a dollar.
 
Comment

jbernie

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2005
927
11
Denver, CO
Compensation to the Apple Board of directors would never be publicly questioned - especially when the company is doing so well and shareholders continue to receive profit.

It all depends on what the compensation is, but regardless it allows the shareholders to express a non binding opinion of what the board is doing regarding compensation. For all we know it could work in reverse and the shareholders could express an opinion that Steve Jobs should be earning more than he is, ie $1 a year should be much more.

If the board makes a changes and the shareholders are very against it and say this through a vote then the board needs to realize that the next time they are up for re-election a similar vote could see some of them lose their position.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.