Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
70,026
41,541


On Friday, the Financial Times reported that Apple is preparing for Tim Cook to step down as CEO as soon as next year, but he might not fully retire. Instead, it is possible that he will become the next chairman of Apple's board of directors.

Tim-Cook-MacBook-16x9.jpeg

Apple's current chairman is Arthur D. Levinson, who turned 75 on March 31. Apple has a policy that states that its directors generally may not stand for re-election after age 75, so Levinson has reached that age limit ahead of Apple's next shareholder meeting, which is when he would otherwise be up for re-election next.

Here is the exact wording of the policy, from Apple's Corporate Governance Guidelines:
A director may not stand for re-election after age 75, but need not resign until the end of his or her term.
Apple is unlikely to name a new CEO before its next earnings report in late January, according to the Financial Times, but it said an announcement could happen early in the year. That timeframe — after January but still early in the year — would align with Apple's annual shareholder meeting, which is typically held in late February or early March.

There is one potential wrinkle: Apple typically releases the proxy materials for a shareholder meeting in mid-January, and that filing would need to indicate that Cook is up for election as chairman. That would be before Apple's next earnings report in late January, so the specific timing of how this might all play out remains to be seen.

If this theory does prove to be accurate, Apple could announce that Levinson is leaving the board due to the age policy, and that Cook will succeed him as chairman. Apple would likely say this move was part of its long-planned succession plan.

At 65, Cook could serve as chairman for up to a decade, before the age policy applies to himself.

In this scenario, it is unclear if Cook would become chairman or executive chairman. In the former role, he would focus more on managing the board and corporate governance. In the latter role, Cook would remain more involved in Apple's day-to-day operations and decision-making, which could help to ease the transition to a new CEO.

Apple's Senior Vice President of Hardware Engineering, John Ternus, is widely viewed as Cook's most likely successor when the time comes.

Daring Fireball's John Gruber and some other commentators have speculated that Apple may have intentionally fed the information about Cook preparing to step down to the Financial Times, so that the actual announcement and the timing of it does not come as a complete surprise to investors and the general public.

Cook has been CEO since August 2011, so he is nearing 15 years at the helm of the company.

This is only one possibility for Apple's succession plans. Alternatively, the company could opt to exempt Levinson from the age policy, as it did for now-77-year-old director Ron Sugar last year. Apple could also elect someone other than Cook as chairman. However, with Cook having reached the typical retirement age of 65, and Levinson having reached the policy age of 75, the stars might align for Cook to become Apple's next chairman.

Article Link: Tim Cook Might Not Fully Retire After Stepping Down as Apple CEO — Here's Why
 
I would imagine it'll be announced by the board that he's going to be on it, as it'll provide market reassurance; but then like a year or so later we"ll get a press release from Tim saying that he's got his own foundation set up and wants to spend more time focused on it and has full confidence in his successor blah blah and he can leave...

I cant see Cook himself wanting to be on the board for a long time - i don think he'd enjoy it - you dont have enormous day-to-day details control - and the new CEO wont want his predecessor looking down deciding what he is doing etc
 
Chairman - Tim Cook
CEO - John Ternus
Probably
I'd be ok with this and hope John would rally to get Cook ousted as quickly as possible. Return to innovation and products and not social causes is where they need to be as there are a lot of android devices coming out with features like the latest phone MKBHD reviewed that it takes a diamond to scratch the ceramic coating. Or the silicon battery on the device. Apple is breadcrumming and have been doing so for too long.
 
Investors would be super spooked if TC left for the beach.

I agree he will be on the board (at least initially) but i dont think investors, unless theyre total morons who dont watch the news of apple at all, should be "super spooked" - they've known this day has been coming for years and years; He's said in interviews going back years that he didnt expect to be at apple another decade etc; he's 65. the clock ticks.
 
If he fully stepped down, perhaps Scott Forstall as CEO?
Scott Forstall? You might want to check the label on whatever it is that you are smoking and titrate the dosage.

Seriously, Apple needs a diplomat and logistics expert at the helm. I'm not saying that is what I, as a customer, want Apple to have. As a customer, I always want the CEO to be a 'product guy' or a 'software gal'. But that just doesn't move Apple's needle (and it is a BIG needle to move).

Realistically (and financially), Apple's secret sauce has been as much in supply chain as it has been in products. And for that, Tim Cook has been superb.
 
Return to innovation and products and not social causes

I don think there is a log of "social causes" going on tbh. It's a tiny fraction at best. Apple has stopped talking about their balck and other communities efforts since Trump is back, their green stuff is just plodding along slowly (and even rolled back with the whole dubious claim of cabon free watches etc) which consists mainly of pre-purchasing power so saving money.
 
Makes sense, that’s exactly what Steve Jobs did:

 
  • Like
Reactions: RMMediccc
I would be shocked if Cook didn't become the chair of Apple.

He's the person who lead apple to be a $4tn company and knows it inside out.

Investors would be super spooked if TC left for the beach.

Everyone who sat around the table with him knows the company just as well. Idiots did not surround him! He can walk away tomorrow, and Apple will do just as well. No one should be surprised if Apple did not actually do better with Cook gone.

No one is irreplaceable; there is plenty of talent at Apple that can sit at the head of the table. Apple needs to move away from its social agenda, go neutral on politics and everything else, and focus on products that make a difference, not implementations as lacking as Liquid Glass, or as divisive.
 
The next year should be interesting then. I can see Cook stepping into a role on the Board. I'm not sure about Ternus though. The company needs someone with Jobs' vision and ruthless sense of purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FatLouie
I just don’t believe Apple would do this change so suddenly across a two month timeline.

Tim is, for the shareholders, one of the most impressive CEOs in the world at the top of his game. Rather than simply announcing his departure in January and voting on his election to chairman two months later, I do believe they’d give Tim a last WWDC, a last September launch, some final event, before turning over the keys to John Ternus.

Maybe the board isn’t that sentimental, but I believe that Apple works slower than this. Levinson will likely get an exemption and stay on for a year or two, Ternus will become more and more central to events, and Tim will be given “one more thing…” to announce. September 2027, and the 20th anniversary iPhone, would be an apt send-off.
 
I agree he will be on the board (at least initially) but i dont think investors, unless theyre total morons who dont watch the news of apple at all, should be "super spooked" - they've known this day has been coming for years and years; He's said in interviews going back years that he didnt expect to be at apple another decade etc; he's 65. the clock ticks.

Many major corporations require a retirement date for their top executives. The issue is that these top-level C-suite people have no real life outside of the company they lead. They are tied, 24-7, to the company, no matter where on the planet they are. Sitting at home, enjoying not having to worry about corporation, is scary for most of them.
 
Everyone who sat around the table with him knows the company just as well. Idiots did not surround him! He can walk away tomorrow, and Apple will do just as well. No one should be surprised if Apple did not actually do better with Cook gone.

No one is irreplaceable; there is plenty of talent at Apple that can sit at the head of the table. Apple needs to move away from its social agenda, go neutral on politics and everything else, and focus on products that make a difference, not implementations as lacking as Liquid Glass, or as divisive.
True. Apple undeniably did a lot better after “Steve” was gone.
 
I just don’t believe Apple would do this change so suddenly across a two month timeline.

Tim is, for the shareholders, one of the most impressive CEOs in the world at the top of his game. Rather than simply announcing his departure in January and voting on his election to chairman two months later, I do believe they’d give Tim a last WWDC, a last September launch, some final event, before turning over the keys to John Ternus.

Maybe the board isn’t that sentimental, but I believe that Apple works slower than this. Levinson will likely get an exemption and stay on for a year or two, Ternus will become more and more central to events, and Tim will be given “one more thing…” to announce. September 2027, and the 20th anniversary iPhone, would be an apt send-off.
While that would be nice and sentimental, I think a relatively quiet exit would actually be very fitting for the reserved, operational expert Tim Cook.
 
what a sad run of a CEO. Sure apple made a bunch of money, but the magic is gone. nothing pushing the boundaries or inspiring. Just safe, small, incremental updates.
To be fair, the Apple Silicon transition was not a small incremental upgrade. Apple made it look easy but that was a monumental decade-long effort that should be applauded. Tim tried to pull a Steve with the AVP, and to a lesser extent the Apple Car Project Titan. Unfortunately, no one was able to replicate Steve’s magic. It isn’t fair to say that Tim didn’t try, or that he only stuck with small incremental upgrades.

The MacBook Pro and entire Mac lineup for that matter is arguably better today than at any point in Apple’s history including under Steve. The Apple Watch and AirPods are both multi-billion dollar class-leading companies on their own. But there is some truth that Tim’s approach was more focused on incremental upgrades and certainly emphasized growing Apple’s services revenue, and did so very successfully.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.