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 Presses for Apple Shareholder Vote on Increased Stock Buyback
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's not much "real" risk (as in you're going to lose your shirt if you fail) when you're richer than god. So what if a BILLIONAIRE loses a few hundred million? It's POCKET CHANGE to them (except when it comes to helping the poor and then it's the poor's fault for being poor and f-them) and they couldn't spend that much in multiple lifetimes except to buy giant companies and loads of shares. They're out of touch with reality and as even the Pope recognizes, the inequality just keeps growing because it takes money to make money and thus it self-perpetuates until society becomes so out of balance that revolutions take hold (witness France 1789). Nobody in their right mind could argue that Carl needs that money or that he could possibly spend it in any wise fashion before he croaks (won't be long) so instead of doing something good with it and perhaps earning some points for a potential after life, he'd rather prove himself a true greedmonger instead. Carl's a true American Hero!
That's a valid opinion. On the other hand according to Forbes, Tim Cook is worth an estimated $400million and Carl Icahn is worth an estimated $20billion. I would argue they both know about long-term wealth.
I'm neither pro or anti Carl Icahn. He's a stockholder and entitled to his opinion on what the company should do with its money. I do agree with another poster's comments here earlier that it would seem he is not making much headway with the management of Apple on his own, given he has resorted to voicing his opinions publicly and launched his non-binding proposal.
what do you know about Apple plans? So tired of people claiming Apple doesn't know what they are doing year after year ignoring that they achieved unprecedented success. If you think you know better go start a company, make a tonne of money and do whatever you like with it. The $100b is Apple's to do what they want with.
Sorry to sound cliched, but nostalgia grips me when thinking of when Steve was at the helm of Cupertino, and macs were upgradeable,
Er, Macs have been heading down the path of not being user serviceable or upgradeable for years, long before Steve Jobs passed away. The Mac Pro was simply the final holdout.
----------
That's a tough one. Like it or not, Carl Icahn's comments *are* news about Apple and deserve to be reported whether we agree with him or not.
Just be such an ignorant hater. What Romney does is very different. Just because you don't like someone's politics is no reason to spout off like a moron.
Steve was all about hoarding cash, because you never know what the future holds. Having $150 billion laying around can ensure Apple is a viable competitor for decades even if there is a sudden downtown or dramatic market shift.
All these parasite investors want is to raid Apple's coffers and leave the company, and fellow investors screwed.
A certain celebrity investor named Carl Icahn, like many regular investors, wants a return on his money and believes that Apple is holding on to way too much cash. While this is a matter of opinion, by any normal measure Apple is indeed holding on to way too much cash.
This particular celebrity investor is particularly unlikeable and has been involved in some shady pump and dumps. People are afraid of this and therefore think any suggestion from him is bad. There are even people here who think Icahn will ruin the company. This is ridiculous.
A stock buyback is one way of providing returns to investors. Remember, investors want a return. There are other ways of providing returns (growing the company or dividends for example).
The amount Mr. Icahn originally asked for ($150 or $200 billion I think?) was outrageously high, and in fact that original request might have been ruinous had Apple needed the cash later.
But he's now asking for a $50 billion buyback, which Apple does have plenty of cash for. He's also asking for a nonbinding vote on the buyback, which Apple can ignore, but it will give the chance for shareholders to show what they want. Shareholders SHOULD have that chance, so I am supportive of this.
If the company is very undervalued, a stock buyback is a fairly good way of doing it because Apple would buying the stock "on sale" so to speak, as they could always reissue the stock later when prices are higher. I am also an Apple investor and I personally think the stock is undervalued or I would sell it.
There are some other complicated issues too, like the fact that this cash is mostly held overseas and that leads to some tax debate as well, but this reply is already too long.
----------
What? As executive of a State, Carl Icahn worked hard to bring universal health care to his people in defiance of his own party and years before Obama?
I didn't say it meant "free". Reducing their prices would mean throwing profits away. Not all of them but some. Why make less money when they can make more?
More to the point, driving down margins, profits, and the stock price.
A great plan, if you aren't an investor.
The unacceptable face of capitalism. I wish he would just drop dead.
----------
Funny how the shares went down when Apple's sales growth slowed and have started to rise again as sales growth picks up with well received new product releases. All without a stock buy back. Funny that. If they invested more of that cash in their business activities rather than wasting it on Buy Backs, then the shares would naturally rise as their revenues and profits continued to rise. The difference is that a Buy Back benefits a few, whereas investment in new products benefits us all.
----------
A certain celebrity investor named Carl Icahn, like many regular investors, wants a return on his money and believes that Apple is holding on to way too much cash. While this is a matter of opinion, by any normal measure Apple is indeed holding on to way too much cash.
This particular celebrity investor is particularly unlikeable and has been involved in some shady pump and dumps. People are afraid of this and therefore think any suggestion from him is bad. There are even people here who think Icahn will ruin the company. This is ridiculous.
A stock buyback is one way of providing returns to investors. Remember, investors want a return. There are other ways of providing returns (growing the company or dividends for example).
The amount Mr. Icahn originally asked for ($150 or $200 billion I think?) was outrageously high, and in fact that original request might have been ruinous had Apple needed the cash later.
But he's now asking for a $50 billion buyback, which Apple does have plenty of cash for. He's also asking for a nonbinding vote on the buyback, which Apple can ignore, but it will give the chance for shareholders to show what they want. Shareholders SHOULD have that chance, so I am supportive of this.
If the company is very undervalued, a stock buyback is a fairly good way of doing it because Apple would buying the stock "on sale" so to speak, as they could always reissue the stock later when prices are higher. I am also an Apple investor and I personally think the stock is undervalued or I would sell it.
There are some other complicated issues too, like the fact that this cash is mostly held overseas and that leads to some tax debate as well, but this reply is already too long.
----------
What? As executive of a State, Carl Icahn worked hard to bring universal health care to his people in defiance of his own party and years before Obama?
Funny how the shares went down when Apple's sales growth slowed and have started to rise again as sales growth picks up with well received new product releases. All without a stock buy back. Funny that. If they invested more of that cash in their business activities rather than wasting it on Buy Backs, then the shares would naturally rise as their revenues and profits continued to rise. The difference is that a Buy Back benefits a few, whereas investment in new products benefits us all.
Funny how a buyback has been going on for this entire time, whether you were aware of it or not. And funny how buyback benefits all stockholders, whether you were aware of it or not.
You are stockholder, right?
It's not one way or the other. Keep plenty for investing in the business. Use a portion to increase the dividends. Use a portion to buy back stock when the company is undervalued (like I said, they can always reissue when the stock is higher).
Apple does make small, smart acquisitions, and I'm supportive of that.
But you assume that investing $50 or $150 billion in their business activities will pay off. It might also just make them bloated. It might make them distracted. It might not pan out at all.
They are already blowing money on things like super tight tolerances and exotic building materials for new campuses which have dubious benefit to anyone, much less shareholders.
In any case, it's irrelevant because Apple isn't investing the vast sums of money. The whole goddamn point is that they've been sitting on hundred of billions of dollars for years and NOT investing it, so they might as well return a portion of the excess to investors.
Sorry to sound cliched, but nostalgia grips me when thinking of when Steve was at the helm of Cupertino, and macs were upgradeable,
I totally agree. The clamshell iBook G3s were so easily upgradeable. Three hours later and an IKEA set later, it was a walk in the park. As was the PowerBook G4. Ever try change the hard-drive on that? Only took 30 screws and a top case that would never fit back on properly. Oh, the first gen MacBook Pros were a dream to upgrade. RAM, and ... Oh, that's pretty much it. I absolutely loved how easy the TiBook was to upgrade as well. A mere three hours of sobbing was all it took.
Macs, disregarding the retina models, have never been easier to upgrade. Your nostalgia is severely misinformed. Plus the super-slim, non-upgradeable model was what Steve had in mind when he said the MacBook Air was the future.
I wish Stalin and Marx would die again, Stalin more painfully.
----------
But why? What's the point?
----------
What? Is there something about Governor Romney I don't know about?
There are many people in this thread that should not be allowed to handle money.
Those people, coincidentally, are the ones who are actually wishing death upon an investor.
Those people, coincidentally, are the ones who are actually wishing death upon an investor.
I trust Jobs' vision over vultures like Icahn and Einhorn.
"Our goal is to increase enterprise value," he said. "Which would you rather have us be? A company with our stock price, and $40 billion in the bank? Or a company with our stock price and no cash in the bank?"
----------
Apple has made several strategic acquisitions in recent years. Just because they aren't blowing their load in some billion dollar 90s style, headline grabbing but largely dubious acquisition does not mean they aren't investing.
You are saying that Apple could go from immensely profitable to unprofitable at any moment. Is that the "vision" to which you are referring?
So I ask again, are you trying to scare people, or do you even know what you are saying?
Here we go, greedy investor who is trying to manipulate a company not for the good of that company but for his own short term gain. This guy doesn't care at all about Apple's future, he only cares about making a vast amount of cash as quickly as possible and to hell with the consequences. If we leaned nothing else from the recent global financial turmoil, it was that people like this are what caused the problem with their short sighted greed.
He owns common shares, like everyone else. His proposal, in his mind, would help everyone with common shares. How about instead of insulting the person you argue about the merits of his proposal?
Carl Icahn signed The Giving Pledge. Know your facts.
Yes, we should all decide whether someone is out of touch with reality from the guy who sits on a golden throne and whose organization has stifled scientific progress, killed untold thousands of Africans by lying about the efficacy of condom use in combating AIDS, and has a stash of the world's greatest art sometimes gotten through questionable means.
Read above. As a christian, I'm assuming, how does it feel to be so judgmental?
----------
I'm scared for the developed world when people like you, who are so incredibly easy to manipulate with a news story or populist narrative however misrepresentative of the actual issue, are voting.