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.
Tim Cook Angrily Rejects Political Proposal Asking for Profits-First Policies
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Can picture it. He would st are the representative in the eye and in a lower still like calm voice with a cold forceful edge give a polite yet backhanded speech for 10 mins that would leave the guy cowering in the corner.
Like others say it is good to see passion from Tim.
This is the difference between the Tea Party and the rest of humanity.
Remember when the GOP abolished slavery? They weren't so bad until Regan and everything that followed.
I want a list of the companies that supports the policy platform of National Center for Public Policy Research so I can make sure to not buy their products.
Not sure if srs or just trollin'.
Onto the topic at hand, good for Tim. Got me to give him extra point in the likability books.
A large percentage of Macintosh/Apple consumers are statistically.... college educated, they have good jobs, higher salaries (than the general PC population), many have professional degrees (medicine, law, etc), etc.
The wealthier people are also statistically more (fiscally) conservative.
The ultra-wealthiest (like the Hollywood celebrities) will embrace Apple because it is perceived as the de facto "premium brand" of electronics in the USA. These same people will also be driving BMWs and Mercedes and Teslas.... but they would never be caught dead driving a Toyota Corolla.
Apple should disclose the costs
IMHO, Apple should disclose the costs on the grounds of being more transparent. As and investor, I'd like to know how my money is being spent. But that's where it should end unless you have a controlling interest on the board of directors. If, as an investor given all the facts, I decide I don't like the way things are being done, I sell my investment. Nobody, repeat NOBODY, buys any stock unless they think that money is going to be worth more down the road. If you think otherwise, not only do I have a bridge to sell you but I can also sell you some insurance for it.
As for the "profits first" comment by the investor in question, that should have been kept to himself because everyone has a different idea of what would be profitable for a company. Case-in-point: Carl Icahn trying to get Ebay to sell off Paypal which is a huge cash cow.
IMHO, Apple should disclose the costs on the grounds of being more transparent. As and investor, I'd like to know how my money is being spent. But that's where it should end unless you have a controlling interest on the board of directors. If, as an investor given all the facts, I decide I don't like the way things are being done, I sell my investment. Nobody, repeat NOBODY, buys any stock unless they think that money is going to be worth more down the road. If you think otherwise, not only do I have a bridge to sell you but I can also sell you some insurance for it.
As for the "profits first" comment by the investor in question, that should have been kept to himself because everyone has a different idea of what would be profitable for a company. Case-in-point: Carl Icahn trying to get Ebay to sell off Paypal which is a huge cash cow.
Cook was baited into this discussion by the NCPPR rep. He had to reply. The topic (profits versus environmental responsibility) was probably not even on the discussion agenda for the Annual Shareholder Meeting.
I agree. Sadly google will overtake Apple by summer.
As a long term investor I'm happy with both companies and hope it lights a fire under Apple to return to greatness. I'm all for ROI at any expense on my money.
Good for Mr. Cook. This group baited him into this response (read their press report) and then wrote a typo-filled response on their website.
This group are ultra-conservative, climate-change deniers that will be of no big loss if they sell their Apple stock. They probably aren't interested in investing in such a left-leaning company that hires homosexuals (gasp!) and whose CEO is one too!
This group are ultra-conservative, climate-change deniers that will be of no big loss if they sell their Apple stock. They probably aren't interested in investing in such a left-leaning company that hires homosexuals (gasp!) and whose CEO is one too!
Actually most of the competition has pretty progressive climate change policies as well. Outside the US climate change isn't a political issue.
----------
Good for Mr. Cook. This group baited him into this response (read their press report) and then wrote a typo-filled response on their website.
This group are ultra-conservative, climate-change deniers that will be of no big loss if they sell their Apple stock. They probably aren't interested in investing in such a left-leaning company that hires homosexuals (gasp!) and whose CEO is one too!
More fun is their FB page. The comments on their post of their press release are more than tempting to troll....
Their name doesn't say anything about being conservative - the MacRumors article labeled them as such. NCPRR stands for National Center something something something - the C doesn't stand for Conservative.
Okay guys, first, I applaud Tim Cook. He truly is making a mark as being a much more bold (in the right ways) leader for the company.
But let's not sit here and say that Jobs would've done this better than Cook.
Why take away Cook's accomplishments like that? Because if you think Steve Jobs was a saint or some "humanity above all" patron, you need to recheck your facts.
Tim Cook is more like Bill Gates in all the right ways when it comes to charity and philanthropy. Steve Jobs cut Apple's charity and philanthropy program as his first task when he was hired back as CEO. He's never publicly donated to charity. Tim Cook initiated charity programs and sold 30 minutes of his time for $610,000 donated to Charity.
Steve Jobs never allowed Apple to be transparent about its suppliers. Tim Cook gave in and allowed Meyer to have a Supplier Responsibility list from Apple.
Was Steve Jobs a great man? Yes he was and it was tragic he passed. But let's stop wiping Tim Cook's name through the mud and always adding, "If Jobs did it!" to the end of everything Cook has done.
Every single step Cook has taken up to now when it comes to the public direction of Apple has been steps a lot of people felt Apple should make, but Jobs emphatically never did.
/sigh. Rant over. As you can tell, I've been largely upset that Cook isn't getting the credit he deserves.
Sauce: http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/02/tim-cook-casts-more-light-on-apples-charitable-contributions/
More sauce: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/0...ings-apple-has-done-since-tim-cook-took-over/
But let's not sit here and say that Jobs would've done this better than Cook.
Why take away Cook's accomplishments like that? Because if you think Steve Jobs was a saint or some "humanity above all" patron, you need to recheck your facts.
Tim Cook is more like Bill Gates in all the right ways when it comes to charity and philanthropy. Steve Jobs cut Apple's charity and philanthropy program as his first task when he was hired back as CEO. He's never publicly donated to charity. Tim Cook initiated charity programs and sold 30 minutes of his time for $610,000 donated to Charity.
Steve Jobs never allowed Apple to be transparent about its suppliers. Tim Cook gave in and allowed Meyer to have a Supplier Responsibility list from Apple.
Was Steve Jobs a great man? Yes he was and it was tragic he passed. But let's stop wiping Tim Cook's name through the mud and always adding, "If Jobs did it!" to the end of everything Cook has done.
Every single step Cook has taken up to now when it comes to the public direction of Apple has been steps a lot of people felt Apple should make, but Jobs emphatically never did.
/sigh. Rant over. As you can tell, I've been largely upset that Cook isn't getting the credit he deserves.
Sauce: http://9to5mac.com/2012/02/02/tim-cook-casts-more-light-on-apples-charitable-contributions/
More sauce: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/0...ings-apple-has-done-since-tim-cook-took-over/
Well done Tim Cook! as a shareholder I definitely approve. I do wonder how these NCPPR clowns even got their proposal on the agenda. what are the minimal requirements for that?
oh and their PR response is freaking hilarious.
oh and their PR response is freaking hilarious.
Lumping everyone together just shows a closed mind. There are conservatives who do care about the environment and social issues. Heck, we wouldn't have our national parks or EPA if not for 2 republican presidents. Yes, there are right wing whackos who only care about money. One could lump all democrats into the socialist regime. Obviously that is not true either. There are plenty of democrats that are pro business. There are also left wing whackos. The unfortunate part, is that the only ones left running the country in DC are the whackos, whether they are left or right winged.
My respect for Tim has gone up seriously on this
and my desire to support a corporation guided by such concerns has been given a boost as well.
Very nice job Mr. Cook.
Very nice job Mr. Cook.
Actually, their charter is to create customers. Shareholder value follows that first objective. Personally, I think the whole "companies exist to add shareholder value" isn't a great idea for the whole economy. You encourage CEO's to inflate stock value by artificial means instead of creating a better widget.
I really hope someone overtakes Apple soon as "the world's most valuable company". Once that happens, all the Sniper rifles will stop targeting Apple, and will switch to targeting The New King of the Hill.
When you are #1, everyone is aiming to bring you down. Everyone wants to gang up on you.
IMHO, Apple does better (innovation, product releases, etc) when it's a low-key dark horse underdog company. There is more spirit and fight (and motivation) in Apple when they know they are in an underdog position.
They label themselves as conservative.
Their browser header on this website includes "A conservative think tank".
There is no editorialising by macrumors whatsoever.
Those same scientists that, in the 70's said we were heading for an ice age?
How do we/they explain the previous times in Earth's history when we were warmer than now without human involvement?
How do they explain the effects of the Sun and the Earth's not exact rotation around the Sun that also affect climate?
How about addressing the single biggest thereat to the planet - exploding population. The Earth can barely support the current level of Humans. How to address de-population?
How can 130 some years predict climate when the Earth is billions of years old?
How do they explain the "cooking of the books" that went on a couple years ago.
When you get anyone chasing free money they will skew the data to get more of that money.
Do you really think if they examined "climate change" and came out that man had no effect they would still be employed?
See, this is the kind of thing that validates my faith in the company, and why I continue to buy their stuff over and above the fact that it's awesome. My friends think I pay the "Apple tax" with all my gadgets, but I have always felt that putting my money towards good things that aren't necessarily the bottom line is well worth it. Want to tax me so everyone in my country can have free health care? You go right ahead (Canadian, BTW).
Tonight, more than usual, I'm a proud Apply Fanboy.
Tonight, more than usual, I'm a proud Apply Fanboy.
- Status