A clue that Apple is ‘cooking’ something up

“In poker, when someone is telling you something without telling you something about their hand, it’s called a ‘tell”.’ And everyone, even those of us that think we’re the best gamblers in history, has a tell,” Quoth the Raven writes for Seeking Alpha. “Tim Cook is no different, and his actions last week at Apple’s shareholder meeting – while saying nothing – seemed to really talk to me about where Apple is headed.”

“Tim Cook’s actions in the midst of a seemingly normal shareholder meeting, suggested something else to me. Call me crazy, but I think Apple is due to get aggressive again – real aggressive,” Quoth the Raven writes. ” I’d like to specifically note the part of the meeting where Cook said to the audience, ‘We want to grow more. And this morning, we want to unveil some new products.’ After realizing he had the audience’s full attention, he then said, ‘I was kidding about the last part.'”

Quoth the Raven writes, “In the midst of being scrutinized for lack of innovation, what CEO comes out and does something like that? A CEO who is holding a big hand, that’s who.”

Read more in the full article here.

29 Comments

    1. A strategy might be to have Apple do absolutely nothing for 18 months – Sammy would have a building full of guys in utter despair with nothing to rip off and then – wham! Apple releases 5 new products all at once. A frenzy would ensue like the world has never seen!

  1. Or, it could be a reaction to a rogue shareholder telling him to screw all your hard work, screw the planet, and screw Apple’s reputation, GIVE ME MONEY NOW!!!

    1. …That came later in the shareholder meeting.

      My impression is that Cook is well aware of all the noise, Apple Bear Bullshit, parasitism, short term thinking long term disaster wrong thinking going on among the riffraff of Wall-Nut Street. He’s daring to be cool, light and humorous about it all. He knows what he’s doing, and that’s the way that he’s doing it. It’s called confidence and self-esteem, regarding both himself and Apple.

      Good choice Mr. Jobs, RIP.

      1. I agree with you completely, especially the last three sentences.
        However, your emotions can sometimes get the best of you by a question like that. I think (I’m just guessing here) that Danhof was trying to evoke an emotional response.

        1. I don’t know what you mean by “your emotions can sometimes get the best of you by a question like that.” Do you mean Cook’s emotions being manipulated by the nature of Danhof’s oratory? If so, I see your point.

          Here is the after-document posted by the irrelevantly named “National Center For Public Policy Research”:

          http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Apple_Tim_Cook_Climate_022814.html

          To quote from this “Press Release”:

          “Mr. Cook made it very clear to me that if I, or any other investor, was more concerned with return on investment than reducing carbon dioxide emissions, my investment is no longer welcome at Apple,” said Justin Danhof, Esq., director of the National Center’s Free Enterprise Project.
          . . .
          “Here’s the bottom line: Apple is as obsessed with the theory of so-called climate change as its board member Al Gore is,” said Danhof. “The company’s CEO fervently wants investors who care more about return on investments than reducing CO2 emissions to no longer invest in Apple. Maybe they should take him up on that advice.”
          . . .
          “If Apple wants to follow Al Gore and his chimera of climate change, it does so at its own peril,” said Danhof. “Sustainability and the free market can work in concert, but not if Al Gore is directing corporate behavior.”

          Etc.

          Clearly, this is a political agenda. Clearly it was a set up to force Tim Cook et al. into a corner, knowing that a response to the negative of his allegations would be forthcoming as would be his own negative to Cook.

          IOW: Plain old manipulation of the room and Apple with damage planned then and there as well as thereafter. All of it was about bettering humanity and Earth our only home, which Danhof resents. That qualifies as psychopathic behavior, in my experience.

          If he wanted to debate the issue, he should have found a forum for doing so. Instead, he only wanted to induce suffering, and that’s all he did. I know I NEVER cowtow to bullies and negative manipulators. I admire Cook for doing the same and being entirely direct about it.

          Meanwhile, the Greenhouse Effect (the actual name of the phenomenon, and nothing else) will be debated, measured, experienced onward into time until it possibly hits us, as predicted, with its expected damage. I hope it’s not real. But at least according to the data we have so far, this theory is well supported, and ignoring it for the sake of cash Ca$h CA$H is not. Clearly, the Danhof’s would deny their house going underwater as long as it profited them in the short term to do so. He has not credibility as a human being, IMHO. I consider him, his organization and his irresponsible bad attitude to be contrary to survival of humanity and our planet. What’s his attitude toward Apple good for? Nothing.

          Meanwhile, I hope Apple continues to balance the profit of business with the profit of human survival.

          1. Yes for your first question.

            After reading the comments you posted I’m more convinced than ever – yea, Danhof has a political agenda. And it’s not corporate transparency or even squeezing more profit out of Apple.

      2. I agree completely. I believe he was the unacknowledged power behind the throne for more years than has been reported or acknowledged. I also think Jony and Tim and company are ready to spring something incredible upon us in the very near future.

        Meeting trolls notwithstanding, I think Tim Cook’s actions in the past couple of years are a credit to the taste and wisdom of Steve Jobs.

    1. And something it may be cooking up is a MAJOR acquisition. Cook at some point said that with reference to Apple’s recent acquisitions of several small companies: Apple has acquired 23 companies in the last 16 months and remained on the lookout for interesting technology and companies. Apple is not in a race to acquire the most companies or to spend the most money, but that “doesn’t mean we won’t buy a huge company tomorrow afternoon,” he said.

      Cook also said the company will provide an update within 60 days on how it will use the cash, which totaled nearly $160 billion at the end of 2013. That time frame is in line with Apple’s previous comments that it would announce its latest cash management plans around April.

      What does that tell you? There’s a possibility that they are right now working on a major acquisition, something like a TV network or a content rich company like Disney. They have the cash to do it. Or, if they went to Comcast and merely THREATENED to do it unless Comcast decided to play ball, what would Comcast do?

  2. I’ve said it here once before, but I’ll say it one more time.
    I think the MDN poll should change to something like “Do you agree with Apple’s environmental policies?” – or – “Did Cook make the correct response to the NCPPR’s question?”

  3. i’d love for apple to unveil something that can’t be copied ..even a little ..even a tiny bit. i’d like for oceanic titans to come out of the sea eating skyscrapers, analysts loose their bladders, eric schmidt to cry like jimmy swaggart at a shareholder meeting and solomé to smile so big her lips bleed. almost.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.