Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Carl Icahn Posts Response to Apple On Proxy Proposal for Share Buyback, Buys $500 Million More in Stock
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why do you cling to this belief? They haven't done so yet. We know the pace at which Apple has broadened its product line, increased its development schedule, acquired additional businesses, and broadened its business model. It's written into their history and DNA. There are no indications they are changing this behavior. And the pile of cash they are sitting on is total overkill given their past behavior. You say "hopefully", as if it would be a good thing to go crazy with new investments. Given their past success with their Apple business formula, I really doubt it.
Obviously to me he didn't. He mistook "over capitalized" (which Icahn correctly said that Apple is) for "overvalued." These are very different concepts. More than happy to have an actual conversation with anyone who starts out with a basic understanding of the facts.
This man gives America a bad name.
He is a pathetic figure who shows no understanding whatsoever of what Apple is or how it works. A company which goes from a garage to the world's biggest company in just 35 years and he has the audacity to tell the board they are a disgrace!!!
He says his proposal would be of benefit to small shareholders. Well I am a 'small' shareholder with 1100 shares as are my wife and three children with fewer shares. We don't need this festering paternalistic dinosaur to speak on our behalf. We will be voting NO
"He argues that Apple's stock -- currently priced at $555 -- would be priced at $840 if its price to earnings ratio was the same as the average P/E across the S&P 500"
Then do us both a favour and buy another $3billion worth of shares and then Sh** t*e F*c* *p.
He is a pathetic figure who shows no understanding whatsoever of what Apple is or how it works. A company which goes from a garage to the world's biggest company in just 35 years and he has the audacity to tell the board they are a disgrace!!!
He says his proposal would be of benefit to small shareholders. Well I am a 'small' shareholder with 1100 shares as are my wife and three children with fewer shares. We don't need this festering paternalistic dinosaur to speak on our behalf. We will be voting NO
"He argues that Apple's stock -- currently priced at $555 -- would be priced at $840 if its price to earnings ratio was the same as the average P/E across the S&P 500"
Then do us both a favour and buy another $3billion worth of shares and then Sh** t*e F*c* *p.
He didn't say that, either.
I stand to gain from a buyback too. Those of us who are stockholders all stand to gain.
That's okay, I don't really want to have a conversation with someone as condescending and short as you are, anyway. All you have contributed to this thread so far is a repetition of 'read the letter' and a reference to 'past threads' as though on a forum everyone is supposed to go and read all past threads on a subject before responding to a new article.
Also, I'm not a he.
You're also missing a key point that people are saying: as a shareholder who stands to gain SO MUCH, Icahn's motivations for this are highly subject and that's why people are reacting with so much skepticism and cynicism to his repeated, arrogant demands for Apple to do as he wishes.
Let's see:
1. Buying companies that can help expand their business? Check!
2. Take risk on a product? Check
3. Rainy day fund? Double/Triple/Quadruple Check!!!
How much money does Apple need for a rainy day fund? And if it comes to needing 150 billion to survive for years, then they're in deeper trouble than I think any amount of money can fix.
"Global consumer network" seems like an arbitrary term for I-don't-know-what but it sounds like it could be a bit outside their business model. And if it takes a significant chunk--if not all--of $150 billion to start building then I don't think they'd have the backing of their shareholders in something that redefines their vision/mission so drastically.
Last edited:
I get so sick of hearing people complain about "greed." Everyone is trying to improve their financial position.
It is greed when you ask for a raise? Look at all those greedy Walmart employees.
People who are starving in Africa would kill for those jobs.
To them complaining that you don't have health benefits might appear greedy since Walmart employees already have enough to eat and aren't living on a dirt floor.
Saying that someone has enough is a matter of your perspective. What is the greed line? When does someone have enough that you can call it greed?
And before you propose some number, think about where the money comes from to capitalize new ventures. If every millionaire decided that they had enough money then they wouldn't need to invest it into new ventures, so where would those business get the money?
It is greed when you ask for a raise? Look at all those greedy Walmart employees.
People who are starving in Africa would kill for those jobs.
To them complaining that you don't have health benefits might appear greedy since Walmart employees already have enough to eat and aren't living on a dirt floor.
Saying that someone has enough is a matter of your perspective. What is the greed line? When does someone have enough that you can call it greed?
And before you propose some number, think about where the money comes from to capitalize new ventures. If every millionaire decided that they had enough money then they wouldn't need to invest it into new ventures, so where would those business get the money?
A number of people on these boards are regular commenters on the Icahn threads, of which there've been at least five or six over the last few months. I'm not suggesting that anyone has to go back and read them (unless you enjoy abuse). I am simply responding to the accusation that I am only telling people to read the letter.
I am doing that in this thread because I think it is ridiculous and insulting to claim an ability to discuss someone's views without actually taking the trouble to read and understand those views. I realize this is standard operating procedure for many on these boards, but it is obvious and true just the same, despite your dismissive attitude.
Be as cynical as you like, that's your privilege. But do yourself a favor and at least understand what is being said first. I happen to think if you do you'll come away less cynically inclined. Maybe not, but it's worth a try.
----------
I'm sorry, this makes no sense.
You still don't understand his argument. He has repeatedly said that Apple's MANAGEMENT is doing a fantastic job. But Apple's BOARD is mishandling their job. He doesn't want the company run differently, he wants the board to do a better job of rewarding the investors in the company. And whether you like it or not, he is absolutely right.
i don't trust the greedy bastard.
I've watched him buy other stocks and forcing his way onto the voting process. I've watched him make a huge profit from his ridiculous wealth that he can so easily manipulate a stock through sheer financial force, and then when everybody jumps in with him... THAT is when he sells, Sells, SELLS his stock for a great profit.
If you are going to follow Icahn... the trick is to get out of the stock before he does!
Good luck all!!
I've watched him buy other stocks and forcing his way onto the voting process. I've watched him make a huge profit from his ridiculous wealth that he can so easily manipulate a stock through sheer financial force, and then when everybody jumps in with him... THAT is when he sells, Sells, SELLS his stock for a great profit.
If you are going to follow Icahn... the trick is to get out of the stock before he does!
Good luck all!!
One of the more interesting observations Icahn made in his letter is that Apple's total expenditures on outside acquisitions over the last 17 years is $7.8B. That's less than $500M a year. Apple cleared more than that since Monday this week.
Icahn may be a pathetic figure--I suppose that's debatable--but he didn't make his billions not understanding business and the stock market.
----------
And I would like to see them get a little more aggressive in the acquisitions arena--where it makes sense, of course. But I agree with you that such action would still fall pathetically short in addressing that huge pile of cash.
I'm totally with you on this. How much money does Apple need to keep on hand to purchase companies? People say, "Apple should just buy X (for example Sony)." But Apple has not done these kinds of deals and shows no likelihood of doing them. And there is no evidence that they would be good at buying and integrating large companies.
So, they need to think about the correct amount that they need to accomplish their strategic plans, and quit hoarding cash.
And just for the record, I think Icahn is a piece of work and really dislike most of what he has done, but that doesn't make him wrong.
There seems to be a lot of knee-jerk reactions every time an MR article includes Icahn in the title. Makes it difficult for a lot of people to weigh the merits of anything he has to say. Even though a lot of disdain felt for the man may be warranted, as an AAPL shareholder I believe him to be dead right on this matter.
That's just one option for verticals. I personally think, with net-neutrality going away, that Apple will have to build their own networks to support their devices.
There's also content production. That could be very expensive proposition as well, anything from gaming to television to movies to music. If they want a strong hand at Apple TV, then they really need to produce their own content, the way Netflix does.
There are many ways a company can expand in ways that strengthen their core business (Apple sells widgets). These are a few of them.
Apple already has their own retail stores, which works great at selling their core products.
Actually folks blame Google for spending its cash all the time. $12 billion acquisition of Motorolo followed by lackluster sales at low margins. Questionable $3.2 billion acquisition of Nest for 100s of times its current profits.
Some people here don't seem to understand the connection between stocks, money and hugely successful investors like Icahn.
Well Google did purchase Motorola, and now Nest. I don't see Apple doing any groundbreaking acquisitions.
Well Google did purchase Motorola, and now Nest. I don't see Apple doing any groundbreaking acquisitions.
Sure, theoretically Apple can do stuff to grow that costs tons of money. But things like acquiring a huge new company, means changing the corporate culture as you integrate all those new people. Apple could acquire Disney, but now a Hollywood deal maker is going to be part of the innercircle making decisions. Apple could acquire Sony, but now half the company is going to be in Japan with their culture.
It would be very hard to spend $100 billion without drastically changing Apple. And lets not forget that even these hypothetical monumental acquisitions could be done with stock instead of cash. Debt is also available and incredibly cheap. And more cash is coming through the door every day. These arguments have been raised since the iPhone started selling, back when the cash pile was $40 billion. And it continues to sit unused.
You wouldn't understand not being Jewish. Generally, it's considered one of the biggest sins imaginable to do something that makes you look bad in the eyes of non-Jews. It's rather hard to explain because the terms I have are all hebrew-based that I'd have to translate... It has to do with not making our God look bad in the eyes of others. Perhaps not as big an issue today seeing as how the christian god is essentially the same thing, but I digress.