“With this week marking the tenth anniversary of the unveiling of Apple’s first-ever iPhone, now seems like a good time to compare the tenures of Steve Jobs with his replacement as CEO over the last five-and-a-half years, Tim Cook,” Rachel Aldrich writes for TheStreet.
“When Jobs officially regained control in 1997 over the company he helped found, Apple shares sat near the equivalent of $0.79 apiece, accounting for two separate two-for-one stock splits during his tenure, and a later seven-for-one split. By the time he resigned as CEO in 2011, shares had skyrocketed more than 6,000% to the equivalent of about $54 per share. Over Jobs’ tenure, therefore, the compound annualized rate of return was about 35%,” Aldrich writes. “In Cook’s time so far as CEO, the stock has more than doubled to around $120, for a compounded annualized rate of return of roughly 16%.”
“The 56-year-old executive recently took a 15% pay cut for the 2016 fiscal year because Apple failed to meet its revenue and profit goals for the year,” Aldrich writes. “The company has faced criticisms recently for slowing down innovation in its devices and for failing to introduce any truly groundbreaking products… And even some of Apple’s long-standing product lines have begun to languish. Apple’s computers have long been neglected,with the iMac and Mac Pro desktops remaining untouched and un-updated for years as MacBook Pro was given an underwhelming update this year.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Betteridge’s law of headlines holds fast – with ease.
That’s not a knock of Cook. Put any name in there instead of Cook’s and the answer would be the same “Hell no!”
I am sick of these types of articles. Steve jobs is DEAD. He’s not coming back. Quit writing stories comparing Tim to a dead man. A much more interesting story would be a LIVE person that is a suitable replacement.
I’m starting to think a dead Steve could run Apple better.
I actually think this is pretty funny.
Yes…it’s quite ridiculous to make these comparisons with Steve…like comparing every Disney CEO with Walt Disney himself.
There was only 1 Steve and that’s why he’s going down in history. No one can do exactly what he did and would have done.
Tim’s done an excellent job in his own right.
FUD alert:
While it is true that the Mac Pro has not been updated for years, the iMac has been updated a couple of times. The iMac design may not have been overhauled, but it has been “touched.”
As far as the new MBP being “underwhelming,” that is an opinion that appears to be in the minority. TheStreet is seeking clicks from Mac advocates with that FUD. Do not give them the pleasure.
I agree with you. It’s like asking if Reagan or Obama measures up to George Washington. George Washington made sure democracy, the constitution, and the Laws of the founding fathers, would be respected.
He made America, with its strengths and weaknesses. (referring to slavery here).
Others may be great, but they followed the first.
PIpeline Timmy’s been holding something else all this time and it ain’t a candle.
Pipeline Timmy is so called because, unlike Steve Jobs who didn’t give a damn what we wanted, Tim Cook succumbed to public pressure to toss out a scrap of hope. He couldn’t violate his company’s sacred oath of secrecy to satisfy the salivating piranhas, so he resorted to vague promises: of future offerings in a metaphorical pipeline.
Timmy’s actual crime is in lacking the aloofness and the mesmerism of Steve Jobs. A reasonable person oughtn’t convict anyone for that; but most of us sketch out reason only when we are called to account, which is usually never.
We can ask for a replacement for the Apple CEO, and along with others I have made such a request. You would laugh at my suggestions for a replacement. OK, I think a mind like Donald Trump’s could handle it. But I think he’s tied up for a few years.
I would never laugh at anything you think.
The irony is that Trump will be the best thing to happen to Apple since Steve Jobs returned. Several hundred billion $ repatriated at a 10% rate is going to be biggest boon to AAPL in a generation.
As I’ve said elsewhere here, I’d rather they kept Scott Forstall. I think he was the closest thing to Steveliness.
Herself, I am indeed laughing. Trump is a so-so real estate developer. He is neither a true visionary like Jobs, nor a hardworking logistics and operations man like Cook. Trump “products” are sourced from other companies and simply customized with the Trump label. He is not creative and he would not be good for Apple.
You make sense a lot of the time, but not this time.
I wish hannahjs would come back…
“OK, I think a mind like Donald Trump’s could handle it.”
Yes, Trump’s mind can handle just about anything. He tamed the stunned Washington press corp yesterday in a come out swinging tour de force. Nobody owns him, simply beautiful.
Let’s hope he works with Apple in productive ways … ☝
“unlike Steve Jobs who didn’t give a damn what we wanted…”
And got away with it!
So let me get this straight. Cook took over a very big company and more than doubled its size to where it currently has the largest market cap in the world.
While technically true, most senior managers hand picked by Steve would have done the same job, if not better. Scott was more like Steve in so many ways and wonder if this rubbed Tim and Jony the wrong way.
Also, Steve’s pipeline was always about five years out, and that special pipeline has now run dry. Cook lacks the “vision thing” and the software detail.credentials, so naturally, he preoccupies his time with social justice crusades something Steve abhorred.
MDN take is spot on, however, PipeDream Tim is obviously over his head. Go back to supply chain genius (with some kinks in the holiday armor) and hire a charismatic leader with VISION … 👁
You have no way of knowing how anyone else would have done as CEO, including Scott Forstall. None would have been Steve Jobs and all would have encountered criticism for that.
As for finding this magical charismatic leader with vision….remember, these type of people, like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, etc…all tend to not want to work for anyone else, but run their own companies that reflect their unique vision…just like Steve.
And even if you could get one of them to run Apple, they still wouldn’t be Steve, because Apple would not be their brainchild…they still would not have that same sense that Steve did for Apple.
“You have no way of knowing how anyone else would have done as CEO.” And neither do you.
Scott and Jony are very creative and have the vision thing. But not to the level of Steve, granted, or anyone else for that matter.
But they have the vision to delight customers, make computers people want to buy and sweat the details infinitely better than tin ear Tim. Surely, others out there, as well.
As far as visionaries running their own company, well, Steve found out all about this in the eighties from Sculley and the board …
I disagree. I think that Steve was smart enough to realize that a lot of the Apple employees were willing to put up with Steve being an asshole a lot of the time but would not have put up with that treatment from Scott, which was supposedly the problem that caused Tim Cook to push him out. I would not be at all surprised if Steve basically predicted this and told Tim that this may eventually have to be done. I’ve gone through succession planning for my own businesses, and these dynamics are fully discussed and planned for.
You raise an interesting argument that may or may not be true.
I suspect Scott and Jony’s visual direction clashes had more to do with the departure.
Steve learned when he returned from the wilderness to lead as a toned down CEO.
People sometimes grow up. Scott may be able to do the same in the highest position commanding Apple.
Sounds like Scott Forstall is very much like Steve.
While TC was “hand picked” by SJ to be an iCEO while he was dying, I wonder if SJ hand picked him to be the next CEO, and if he did was SJ thinking clearly?
Perhaps Scott Forstall will return and save Apple just like SJ did.
“Perhaps Scott Forstall will return and save Apple just like SJ did.”
I hope so … 🙏🏻
Please get over the love of size and market cap as soothing proof that everything’s ok. It’s very naive. The same with qrtly revenue & profit. Unless Apple experiences a Volkswagon -like event, there’s no good reason why Apple’s income should drop markedly anytime soon. I’ve never seen the discussion on MDN as related to profitability, but as it relates to innovation and the measurements for this aren’t size/market cap/rev/profit. Btw, Exxon was #1 in market cap in ’12. Now they’re 7th and AAPL holds 2nd.
correction: AAPL is #1 in m-cap
You say that you don’t care for measuring market cap, revenue or profit as a way of assessing the success of a business.
Exactly what do you propose as a better metric? If you wanted to use something like innovation as a metric for comparisons, you would instantly run into problems trying to put a figure on innovation and would run into additional problems getting others even to agree about what counts as true innovation.
There are things that can be reliably measured or counted, such as financial performance, but there is no way to meaningfully compare things like innovation, forthcoming pipeline, quality of products, ability to please power users or likelihood to make the press go “Wow”.
Financial results don’t tell the whole story about how well a business is being run, but the numbers used are audited and verifiable. Comparing other metrics would be hopelessly subjective. For instance, how would you put a figure on the quality of your life, the prospects for the future of your primary relationship or how proud you are of your children? Would others agree with any figure that you came up with?
Of course choosing low vs high rev/profit would be idiotic and I’m not saying the balance sheet isn’t relevant. For comparison, look at Dell in the late 90’s/early 2k. Dell had the magic potion…very/very robust balance sheet, consumer cool and industry respected. M Dell thought, given AAPL’s probs, it might be good to close the doors and return $$ to the shareholders. This “rightful” hubris was coming from a CEO that oversaw a company with a great balance sheet, good stock price and no indication that the future was anything but “upwards.” Even Apple had some of the “got be like Dell” mindset. Fast forward to ’06, SJ emailed his employees, after AAPL’s worth closed above Dell’s. Why? it wasn’t b/c Apple had incorporated some of Dell’s online sales magic, nor was it merely b/c Apple had better acct’g. It was b/c of the object, or, by this time the objects. The iMac and iPod/iTunes were forming the market. They became the standard to which the industry ascribed. The iPh and iPad followed having the same impact. It is the object, product, offering that has historically given Apple distinction. I will say it again, using Dell as a great example…it is a mistake to see healthy balance sheet, high stock price/market cap, as the definitive sign of health…esp considering Apple’s history/DNA. The “object” is the life-line, the tender/feeder of the balance sheet, et al. If Apple is becoming an IBM, 3M, or a company of that ilk, forget all of the above…Apple has then lost it’s verve that’s likened to a start-up that aims for revolutionary creativity/innovation. I’m not saying the verve is gone, I’m hopeful, but very/very wary of the Dell/balance sheet malaise
Give Tim Cook enough time and see how Apple fares. I am amazed how well Apple has withstood Tim Cook’s poor decision making.
“With this week marking the tenth anniversary of the unveiling of Apple’s first-ever iPhone, now seems like a good time” to write another, yet another critique of Tim Cook’s Apple. “Seems like a good time” to who?
How about something thoughtful? How about something intriguing” How about something truly insightful? Not more of the same of crap, this time dressed up with a lead in related to perhaps the most amazing event in the history of modern consumer technology.
I am sure they would love to write something interesting but the company they cove appears to have run out of interesting things for them to write about.
I am not sure if Apple was the largest company in the world based on Market Cap when Jobs died, but it was at least in the top 5. For one of the top 5 Market Cap companies to grow at a compounded 16% for 5.5 years is still pretty amazing. It would be interesting to see how the other 4 performed over that period. If Apple continued the 35% compounded rate for 10 more years they would be worth almost $3trillion. At some point this type of growth is logically unsustainable. I don’t know enough about running such a large organization with such a dynamic playing field, but as an investment it seems like it has done pretty well. It seems like there are a lot of people out there who feel that Apple will crash very quickly because of his leadership and I seem to remember hearing this loudly back in 2013 when the stock went to around $53/share, now we are at $119…..I think what I sense the most is that most of these prognosticators should be glad someone other than them is running Apple.
Thank you for pointing out the important point. Steve grew the company at a larger compounded rate because when he took over the company was much smaller.
For a company the size of Apple to average a 16% return under Cook is remarkable. Any company would love to have that rate of growth.
Yes, he could on account of Steve Jobs, being dead, couldn’t do anything to keep anyone from holding any kind of light emitting device to him. Candle or otherwise.
Steve Jobs is gone. Everything else is speculation. He left in place the best team he could assemble. Comparisons while potentially entertaining are useless. The King is dead. Long live the King. Steve is still the spiritual leader at Apple. But for Tim Cook and Apple to be great, they need to do it their way, however inspired and respectful of Steve they feel.
For what it’s worth, I think Steve Jobs will be looking down at Apple inc. with a big grin on his face, knowing that in Tim Cook he chose the right guy to continue to run Apple inc. in the way that he wanted, nothing else is worth saying, except that Steve Jobs can rest easy!!
Cook has coasted for a long time on Job’s creations, and will probably do so for as long as he is at the helm. Bottom line, though, he’s turned Apple into a one trick pony. The growth however has stalled, the last year reporting declines for iPhone, iPad, and Macs. Most troubling is how Apple is removing features rather than adding value generation after generation. That does not bode well for the future if Apple isn’t selling what people want. Apple seems to have no exciting mainstream products to offer that appeal to the mass market. Watches and wireless earphones are not mass market.
So it is no surprise that users and investors are getting tired of Pipeline Timmy. They have no faith in his ability to release exciting must-have new products. If Apple was to screw up the iPhone or iOS app store, investors would slaughter the stock price.
“Most troubling is how Apple is removing features rather than adding value generation after generation. That does not bode well for the future if Apple isn’t selling what people want.”
Well said, Mike.
My number one complaint, as well.
I don’t need Apple software dumbed down for the masses or killed forever altogether. Make a consumer and prosumer version — done!
I don’t need thin fashion objects to impress the gliterati and remove ports that complicates setup, transport and my wallet.
I don’t need buggy software not fully vetted before release.
I don’t need a cloud ball and chain around my devices.
I don’t need to purchase new Macs sporting a three year old design at the same inflated prices when the innovation, speed and value is anywhere but Apple.
Apple giveth, and Apple taketh away. That is not value. That is not smart. That is transparently sad — sell less for more money. What a wonderful business strategy. 🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑
Pro user from the long ago and far, far away, eighties … 🙏🏻
The phone – which is no longer superior to any of the good ones from competitors, the watch – which has a limited market, and wireless ear pods – which are just odd, are indeed one-trick ponies. With computer customers seriously looking over MSoft options to meet their needs and desires, the fact that Apple Inc. is a big company is a completely useless distinction. Tim Cook is why.
I have been trying to promote Angela Ahrendts or Scott Forstall as potential replacements for Tim Cook. I seem to be spinning my wheels in the mud of recalcitrant complacency. The Apple BOD don’t respond to individual suggestions or complaints, unless one happens to be a celebrity, or a stockholder which I am not. One’s only recourse seems to be social activism through internet forums and the like, hoping to build a groundswell of support for one’s desired candidate, but corporate governance has not yet arrived at the nexus where thoughts of commoners are meaningful. Thus, for the time being, I will tell myself I have done all I could, and continue to bitch, however ineffectively, about the matter. At least I have plentiful company.
Disagree total on the Microsloth opinion. Apple lacks the WOW factor but it’s not the backward, clusterfuck the ‘Sloth is.
Agree on Scott. He would turn it around in a heartbeat … 💌
The iPhone is still far superior to any other phone on the market, and continues to grab the vast majority of profits in the mobile phone industry.
The AirPods are a runaway hit, universally praised even by skeptics.
MSoft is not gaining anything on Apple. Their Windows Phone has lost market share. Soon the sales of Apples devices…MacOS and iOS…will surpass those of Windows PCs + Windows tablets/phones.
Apple is still the best. By far.
But — the volume, and vehemence, of attacks upon Apple in this very forum, by avowed supporters, is disheartening in the extreme. I want to believe in their good intentions, but I am frightened by their intransigence. At times, I feel that I should flee for my life, lest my loyalty be confused with treason. I wonder, has delirium always been associated with the engineering arts?
Loyalty, like respect, must be earned and rewarded, not taken advantage of and squandered.
Apple of old earned both from longtime supporters. The current Apple has burned a few too many bridges for some of us to remain unquestioningly loyal to them.
“Blind faith in your leaders, or in anything, will get you killed.” – Bruce Springsteen
A company, any company, rates much lower than that.
For goodness sake, it’s a company, not your country. Time for a refresher at the Ashram.
If Tim held a candle to him I’m sure it’d burn Steve’s ass….
😀
ROTFLMFAO! HELL no! What kind of question is THAT?
Thats easy. NO.
Hi! I’m Scott Forstall. Remember me? I do. I remember all of the good stuff I did, except for the maps thing but my friend Tim Cook forced me to release it before it was time, then he blamed me and sacked me. If you sack Tim, I promise to bring a more mellow self back to Apple and give it the vision thing once again.
No, don’t sack Tim; Keep him as the supply chain officionado and social justice warrior. I was too harsh. See? I mellowed a lot.
Yes. You. Can!
I like Scott! ♻️
Simple answer is NO.
Cook is lost w/o Jobs, which means Apple is drifting with no clear direction.
Even if what you are watching features someone who is 18+ years old, you’re still engaging with an industry where many photos and films are made of people without their
consent, or who have been led to believe they cannot withhold
their consent for fear of major repercussions. http://www.myprotrackplus.com/index.php/component/k2/item/23-pretium-nibh-tincidunt-eget-urna-tincidunt-faucibus?error=DIFFERENT_DOMAIN&back=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rveducation101.mobi%2F
NOT impressed with Tim Cook.. get rid of them!
Sign Here:
https://www.change.org/p/apple-board-of-directors-remove-tim-cook-as-ceo-of-apple
The lack of managing the talent and product cycles, release dates and inventory, marketing and strategy is WHY he must be replaced immediately.
Remarkable things here. I’m very glad to peer your article.
Thanks so much and I am taking a look ahead to
touch you. Will you kindly drop me a mail?