Apple Q1 2007 Financial Results Webcast

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 15, 2007.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Apple will be broadcasting their Q1 2007 Financial Results on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 at 2pm PST (5pm EST). Apple's 1Q 2007 ran from October to December 2006, and there are some indications that Apple's iPod and MacBook products did extremely well, with Apple's products reigning the bestseller lists at and the iTunes store getting overwhelmed on Christmas Day.

    Financial results and recent sales performance will be disclosed, and questions from the call attendees will be taken (and perhaps answered).
  2. Grimace macrumors 68040


    Feb 17, 2003
    with Hamburglar.
  3. applelabs macrumors member

    Jan 9, 2007
    "We can't talk about future products"
    There, I answered all the questions.
  4. Rocketman macrumors 603


    So let's come up with some answerable questions.
  5. kresh macrumors 6502a


    My question

    My burning questions:

    1) Who decided on the name change of Apple Computer Inc. to Apple Inc. ?

    2) Was this decision voted by the board ?

    3) Why was this decision not brought before the shareholders for a vote ?

    edit: I think this is material and that all shareholders should have voted on an issue of this importance. What if the board (or Steve) decided to name the company something completely different?

    Despite what Steve thinks, and the way he acts, this is a public company - no longer his own private kingdom being run from his garage!
  6. freeny macrumors 68020


    Sep 27, 2005
    Location: Location:
    They have historically fell upon good quarterly news.
  7. Daveway macrumors 68040


    Jul 10, 2004
    New Orleans / Lafayette, La
    Because its Apple and they can do whatever the hell they want. :rolleyes:
    PS: I'm a stockholder
  8. kresh macrumors 6502a


    I am a stockholder as well and I damn sure did not get a letter from the board asking for my proxy to gain my votes!
  9. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Jul 16, 2002
    You didn't get to vote on Steve's stock options, either.

    Common stock holders get very little say in the running of corporations, unless they own enough stock to become members of the board. Then they get to give themselves stock options. (Yes, the system is rigged.)

    As a stockholder you can always attend the annual meeting and complain. I'm sure the board will thank you for your interest.
  10. kresh macrumors 6502a


    I have no illusions that my small voting block matters, not even a little.

    It just irks me to death. I get proxy requests all the time from companies I own stock in. Except from Apple.

    A small part of me hopes that Steve gets a huge slap from the government over the backdating scandal, maybe even a little personal, Martha Stewart like, treatment at Club Fed!
  11. mclosers macrumors member

    May 1, 2003
    Um what?

    I am also a stock holder... and how a public company works is
    the day to day operations of the company is not done by the shareholders!

    Personally Steve Jobs can run the company however he wants as long as he is increasing stockholder value, which I think he is doing at an enormous pace.

    People that make the comments made above, are the same ones who make the government run so inefficiently, asking 5000000 people if you can make simple decisions. If he makes a decision that materially effects the value of your stock, you can whine about it.
  12. kresh macrumors 6502a


    Changing the name of the company is obviously not a common day to day decision, and you know it.

    Changing the company name has the potential to materially affect the value of the stock.
  13. bmoseley07 macrumors member


    Jan 13, 2007
    That'll do wonders for your stock. Good thinking.

    And so would Jobs getting locked up for a bit.
  14. kresh macrumors 6502a


    I said it was a small part :eek:
  15. WildCowboy Administrator/Editor


    Staff Member

    Jan 20, 2005
    So does whether or not they release new Mac Pros at next week...would you like to vote on that, too?

    Apple structured the name change such that they merged with a wholly-owned subsidiary called Apple, Inc. Avoiding the costs of having to send out proxies to all shareholders is a good thing in my opinion for something as minor as this. They haven't been a "computer" company for over five years's time the name reflected reality.
  16. bmoseley07 macrumors member


    Jan 13, 2007
    :D Alright.
  17. bmoseley07 macrumors member


    Jan 13, 2007
    I'm sorry but I have to agree with Kresh on this one.

    Changing a company's name, whether it's just taking a word out or not, is not an everyday operation and could effect the stock adversely.

    Although, I can see where SJ wouldn't want to do this, with his secrecy policy n all.
  18. inkswamp macrumors 68030


    Jan 26, 2003
    Given that people read way too much into anything Apple and/or Steve Jobs says or does, I would say making the name change public by revealing it to shareholders would have sent all kinds of weird messages and have been interpreted in all sorts of loony ways that could have negatively affected Apple's stock. Imagine what would have happened if word had leaked to all the jittery Chicken Littles in the tech press: "OH MY GOD! They're dropping 'computer' from their name! The Mac is going to be discontinued! Why else would they have kept it quiet?! It's the end of the world!!!"

    Instead, Jobs was savvy enough to know how to do it right, make it public and explain it while he has everyone's attention so it's clear that the Mac is going to be around. Notice how he made comments about how some great things are coming for the Mac at the beginning of the keynote and emphasized that even through they aren't talking about the Mac, it's still important? I would think shareholders would be pleased with how carefully it was handled.

    You know, even with that, I've already read some crazy-ass speculation about the Mac disappearing. Imagine what would have been happening if the word had gotten out without Jobs giving his explanation. It would be ridiculous.
  19. abrooks macrumors 6502a

    Sep 18, 2004
    London, UK
    Damn, wish I'd thought of that scheme :rolleyes:

    Doesn't matter how you look at it, Steve Jobs has done amazing things for Apple's stock, and this company name change is unlikely to be thought up Jobs sitting in bed one night reading iWoz, who suddenly jumps up and shouts, 'REMOVE COMPUTER!', [is then seen running down street in Disney PJs]. The decision was most likely an advisor to Steve, or even more likely a board decision which has a lot more control than the measly stock holders, of which I am one.
  20. StuPidQPid macrumors member

    Jan 12, 2006
    Tucson, AZ
    Last time I looked that was called a Democracy.

    A few people making decisions for 5000000 without asking ... Last time I looked that was called a Dictatorship.
  21. sososowhat macrumors 6502

    Feb 20, 2003
    Palo Alto, CA
    Changing the name reflects a change of direction that's taken place since the iPod first came out. The bigger shift here is that "mac"world was all about iPhone. It's not practical that shareholders vote in advance on whether to redirect the company toward or away from phones or computers. The good news is that the stock is very liquid - you can sell tomorow if you want, as it happens for a very good price. When we invest in a stock like Apple's we're saying that we trust management & the Board to act in our interest.
  22. DTphonehome macrumors 68000

    Apr 4, 2003
    I agree completely. The panic would have been palpable if this had leaked out. It's clear Apple is moving on from its core business of computers, so a name change made perfect sense. That it was done as Apple introduced a major new noncomputer product (the iPhone) made it apparent that this was not due to a failing computer business, but due to the success of their consumer electronics ventures.

    And yeah, I'm sure that earnings will give a nice boost to AAPL. Split anyone?

    EDIT: w00t! 500 posts!
  23. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Jul 16, 2002
    A lot of things could effect the stock adversely, but that doesn't mean you get to vote on them. Common stock holding means being along for the ride. It could be a good ride, or it could be a bad ride. The point is, it's a ride. You don't get to steer.
  24. StrictlyCircus macrumors newbie

    Apr 19, 2006
    New Jersey
    Seems like some people are delusional about what being a shareholder means.

    You own a piece of paper, not the company... as idealistic as it may be for all shareholders to have a piece of the company, it's just not true. Large shareholders and options holders have say because they have the ability to influence the stock's value.

Share This Page