“CEO of Apple, Inc. — Tim Cook — is his own man,” Mark Reschke writes for T-GAAP. “He is no Steve Jobs (who is?) and has certainly done many things differently than Jobs would have.”
“This isn’t to say that Cook’s direction is poor, and Jobs was perfect,” Reschke writes. “Stated another way, Apple is no longer running on Jobs’ legacy thoughts and leadership. The ship is truly Tim Cook’s to maneuver.”
Four things Tim Cook did that Steve Jobs would never have done:
1. Non-Profit Matching Funds
2. Maps Apology
3. Going Into Debt
4. Firing of Scott Forstall
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
Or Listen to Carl Icahn.
Who said he is listening. He is just being polite because Tim knows Ichan is a Certified Asswipe (I am sure Tim has seen the documents) and wants to keep things cool. It doesn’t mean Tim has to follow any advice from him. He is a minor shareholder. No matter how he positions himself. And I haven’t seen a group of any kind supporting Ichan’s blathering.
Only four? Try harder.
5. Guys.
Awwww Just kiddin – just having some fun here. 🙂
still funny any who
ahhh its a brilliant joke – come on
And absolutely no offense to Tim Cook -I am the same – (in any probably chance he sees this…) He seems like a good egg.
Dividends. But I LOVE getting them!
Wish Apple would have had a 2 for 1 split 2 years ago, instead stock buy backs.
5. Refer to a woman as “wicked smart.”
Debt is not a bad thing. It’s managed debt. Managed debt is essential to a healthy balance sheet. They are not held hostage to anyone like normal citizens are held hostage to mortgages, etc.
This is not true.
What’s the largest debt holding with which you’ve personally negotiated and been directly involved? For me it’s $1.5 billion. Very small by Apple’s scale, but very large by most people’s and most companies’ scales.
Debt holders (corporate bond holders, note holders, etc.) DO indirectly (and sometimes directly) have a say in what the company does. They often have more leverage than large stockholders. It is the reality of the situation, and I can say that from personal experience.
Debt is extremely rarely a good thing. You do it when you must. You shouldn’t do it when you don’t have to do so.
Well, I ain’t no big time billion and a half investor, but I have had small experience with debt. I have a mortgage, at 3.25%. I do not need a mortgage, I have more than enough assets to pay it off, but I do not because I am making more than 3.25% on my investments. I have several stocks that pay more than that in dividends. I see it a as a sort of arbitrage, borrowing at a rate lower than my assets earn. Also I get an annual tax break on my mortgage interest. My stocks will earn capital gains and will not be taxed until I sell them. I plan to do that whenever the tax advantage is best. So you may thing I am stupid, because you are a big shot billionaire. I do not know any billionaire investors but I would think you would be too busy or important to come here.
Debt is debt. If you fall on hard times and you’ve taken on debt, you’ve made it much harder on yourself to recover. This “debt is essential to a healthy balance sheet” is just bullshit they teach MBAs.
Debt IS a bad thing. The only reason Apple has debt on their books is because of the government’s brain-dead policy of penalizing American companies for bringing foreign earnings back into the USA.
-jcr
Debt is a financial tool. I avoid debt, where possible and practical. But I borrowed to purchase a new (used) home and to get a new car on rare occasions.
The odd thing about Apple’s debt is that I don’t think that it was strictly necessary. The stock buy back plan could have been funded via ongoing profits. But Apple got a good deal on the financing, so it really isn’t a bad deal either way.
The first half of those four things is ignorant nonsense:
1. Apple has arranged charity matching programs before Timothy Cook became CEO. Jobs even wrote letter on this to Apple employees.
2. Jobs numerously apologised about many things he and Apple did wrong.
Agreed.
I believe the ONLY one of those four that Steve really would never have done is # 3. Going into Debt.
One of Steve’s highest priorities in bringing Apple out of the Dark Days was eliminating Apple’s debt. This eliminated the possibility of those debt holders (the organizations who need to be paid back) having any leverage at all over what Apple does. Steve was a very adamant believer in the idea that Apple needed to be free to make its own path with no one else being able to tell Apple what to do.
Steve believed that Apple knew what was, is, and will be best for Apple and Apple’s customers. He was equally adamant and resolute in his belief that outside analysts, Wall Street, and even sometimes Apple’s own customers did not know what was best for Apple.
Going into debt lets others have a say in how Apple moves forward. If Apple is stupid enough to bend to Icahn’s desires and goes into more debt to do Icahn’s massive buy-back then the debt holders will have even more control over Apple.
While Steve did pay attention to Wall Street and Washington (only idiots would say otherwise), Steve did not let either one have any say in the future of Apple.
Apple needs to keep control over Apple within Apple.
You (and many others here) are confusing “taking on debt” with “going into debt”. Apple did not go into debt. They took on debt because it made financial sense to do so. They’re taking advantage of low interest rates and working tax law to their advantage.
Going into debt would imply that they don’t have a negative cash position. In reality, they could (if they wanted) pay off that debt, not only with the cash on hand, but the cash they’d make from this quarter’s profit alone.
I think DeRS is right on the first two… especially when Jobs cut short his last vacation with his family in Hawaii just to come and apology for antenna-gate.
As for #3, Debt… Jobs wasn’t a money man. He hired very smart people who were and would’ve most likely followed their advice as long as it allowed him to continue to run the company the way he wanted (which it did). It’s important to note that Jobs hired both a consulting firm and internal executives to deal with the growing cash horde before he stepped down.
4. Firing of Scott Forstall
He might have done that just by inadvertently stepping into the same elevator with him! Seriously though, Forstall was kept in check when Jobs was with the company. He broke when Jobs left and Cook had to deal with him. It’s impossible to know for sure what action Jobs would’ve taken with the Forstall that Cook was dealing with, but this wouldn’t have made my list either.
Steve would never have had to fire Scott Forstall because Scott listened to Steve. Scott’s biggest mistake was thinking he didn’t have to listen to Tim.
Jobs the idealist. Cook the pragmatist. That’s all you need to say. And it’s also why the Jobs/Cook team was so exceptional. Creative purity tempered by efficient practicality.
SLAM – perfect
ken1w….
pure/true/simple encapsulation.
Steve Jobs would never be always talking about the next big thing from Apple! And when you tell the world that that will happen NEXT YEAR, investors step away from the stock until NEXT YEAR! Idiots and clowns playing poker. Tim, you never show your cards until you are ready to play the cards!!!
Steve Jobs would never be always talking about the next big thing from Apple! And when you tell the world that that will happen NEXT YEAR, investors step away from the stock until NEXT YEAR!
Idiots and clowns playing poker. Tim, you never show your cards until you are ready to play the cards!!!
He should also use foreign funds to buy manufacturing facilities instead of relying on idiots. Also drop the price and work on thin AMAZON margin and kill all the oppositions. Dont let them grow.
1) Apple does buy equipment for manufacturing and testing their products, even then the fabrication facility is owned by a supplier.
2) Many companies lower their prices when possible to drive competition into the ground. While it may be an effective strategy, this is not Apple’s way and we should be happy for it. Apple does not respond to competition by driving them under because their strategy is to beat the competition by driving innovation from within. The leadership at Apple is smart enough to know that they need competition to motivate them. Without it Apple would risk becoming like Microsoft or the American auto industry, fat oligopolies with little motivation to move the state of art, technology or human affairs forward,
Where does “Let iOS7 out the door looking like it does” fall under ? Firing Forestall ? If he was still there would iOS7 have a better UI instead of the clusterf**k that it is ?
Yawn. There’s nothing wrong with iOS 7. It functions almost the same as iOS 6 just without the nasty green felt and faux leather.
I like iOS 7- really don’t understand the whining.
USB 3!!!
Steve would never have adopted so quickly… He always pushed his own stuff… ADC, FireWire, thunderbolt, lightning, etc