“‘Think different’ became Apple’s creed during the late Steve Jobs’ reign as CEO. Now, chief executive Tim Cook is embracing the idea while making decisions that would have seemed crazy to his fabled predecessor,” Michael Liedtke writes for The Associated Press. “Apple’s pending purchase of headphone maker and streaming music company Beats Electronics for $3.2 billion is just the latest example of Cook’s deviation from Jobs, who had so much confidence in his company’s innovative powers that he saw little sense in spending large amounts of money on acquisitions.”
“Cook became chief executive in late August 2011, roughly six weeks before Jobs died. But in a number of ways, he is just beginning to put his own imprint on Apple,” Liedtke writes. “Cook is straying from Jobs’ cash-hoarding habits by committing to return $130 billion to shareholders through dividends and stock buybacks. He has orchestrated a company stock split and agreed to match employees’ charitable contributions up to $10,000 annually.”
“The shift in management philosophy has resulted in an odd twist: Apple Inc.’s pace of innovation has slowed and it now looks more like a conventional company than the corporate rebel Jobs tried to cultivate,” Liedtke writes. “Instead of releasing revolutionary gadgets such as the iPod, iPhone and iPad, Apple has been mostly upgrading existing products and figuring out ways to manage its bulging bank account since Cook took over.”
MacDailyNews Take: That’s a falsehood:
• iPhone was released 5 years, 7 months, and 19 days after iPod.
• iPad was released 2 years, 9 months, and 5 days after iPhone.
• Tim Cook has been Apple CEO for 2 years, 8 months, and 19 days.
Liedtke continues, “‘We have not seen any dramatic product changes to suggest Apple has evolved a lot from where it was three to five years ago, but it sure feels like the company is pregnant and we will soon know a lot more,’ says Forrester Research analyst Frank Gillett. ‘If a Beats acquisition is the biggest news of the year, then it will be a bust.'”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Analyst Sacconaghi on Apple buying Beats: ‘We struggle with the rationale for this deal’ – May 12, 2014
Cody Willard: Apple’s Beats buy is just stupid
– May 12, 2014
Apple may unveil Jimmy Iovine, Dr. Dre executive appointments at WWDC – May 12, 2014
Apple CEO Tim Cook’s pursuit of Beats seen presaging more takeovers – May 12, 2014
Former eMusic CEO explains why Apple wants to buy Beats – May 12, 2014
Apple’s deep ties with Jimmy Iovine key driver of Beats deal – May 12, 2014
Removal of Dr. Dre video about Apple-Beats deal likely means acquisition is real and imminent – May 10, 2014
Game changer: Apple buying Beats could radically transform the digital music business – May 9, 2014
If Beats deal happens, Apple is acquiring a fad, not quality, and that is troubling – May 9, 2014
If Apple’s really buying Beats, here’s hoping it’s brilliant in a way which isn’t immediately obvious – May 9, 2014
The reason for Apple’s $3.2 billion interest in Beats? Spotify – May 9, 2014
Apple buying Beats Electronics: Its best idea since the iPad? – May 9, 2014
Why would Apple want to blow $3.2 billion on Beats Electronics? – May 8, 2014
Apple in talks to buy Beats Electronics for $3.2 billion – May 8, 2014
Apple deserves to enjoy the fruits of it’s labor. To ask it to create the next BIG thing every few years is ludacris.
Or, if you’re listening on BEATS headphones, it’s Ludachrist.
Who is Ludachrist?
Kanye West’s next kid. Still in the planning stages.
Haha!
Apple would innovate an iPhone could cough up iGold, iDollar, iGourmetDinner, iHouse, iAirplane, iBeautiful, iHandsome.
I swear many of these analcysts are cocaine addicts and have no comprehension of the real pace of time or the normal pace of business and technology innovation. They are a detriment to the tech community, wasting our time and diverting our attention with crap like this article by Michael Liedtke who writes for The Associated Press. (0_o) 😯
Cook became chief executive in late August 2011, roughly six weeks before Jobs died/
INCORRECT! 🙁
Didn’t do your homework, Michael Liedke!
What really happened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Cook
Cook served as Apple CEO for two months in 2004, when Jobs was recovering from surgery for pancreatic cancer. In 2009, Cook again served as Apple CEO for several months while Jobs took a leave of absence for a liver transplant.
In January 2011, Apple’s Board of Directors approved a third medical leave of absence requested by Jobs. During that time, Cook was responsible for most of Apple’s day-to-day operations while Jobs made most major decisions. After Jobs resigned as CEO and became chairman of the board, Cook was named CEO of Apple Inc. on August 24, 2011. On October 5, 2011 Steve Jobs died…
I.E. Cook becoming CEO ‘six weeks’ before Jobs’ death is quite wrong.
And yet, people read this crap, as Michael Liedke etc. write it, and think it’s reliable, researched journalism. It is NOT. Thus begins the nonsensical mythology and noise-noise-noise of people arguing that wrong crap like this is actually true because some guy at the Associated Press said it. SHAMEFUL.
Hmm, let’s see:
Aug 24 + six weeks = Oct 5!
Cook was *officially* named CEO on Aug 24, Steve died on Oct 5.
Sounds like the author is right after all.
And… you’re officially a myth mongering idiot, just as I pointed out in my post. Aren’t I smart?
I have been a little out of touch on this so I ask please excuse my ignorance…
But has anyone been talking about Beats being an Apple project from inception? I don’t think it’s implausible.
If anything, that’s the kind of person Tim is. I would guess he’s a mastermind kind of thinker.
Takes one to know one. 😉
How about the Mac Pro goof ball!!! “Innovate my ass.”
What would Thomas Edison do?
I call BS. I don’t believe that Apple will pay 3.2 billion. All this hype is total BS. So, all these articles about this purchase are BS^2. Like the widescreen AppleTV, I’ll believe it when I see it.
Steve Jobs made a mistake appointing Tim Cook as CEO. Tim Cook is a manager not an entrepreneur. An entrepreneur can see things coming up over the horizon. Managers can’t see the horizon, managers only put systems in place.
Welcome Ms. Ahrendts…..
I am tired if this. Jobs was wrong in holding too much $$$. Cook gives it back he is wrong. What universe is this anyway
Omg and Google glass and Samsung watch. My God if Apple ever put that the press the analysts would have been on them for a piece of junk being delivered. Cook learned that with maps.
Here’s my take: Apple’s music business is mature, but still popular and incredibly profitable. Apple’s brain trust is focusing on new products, which we’ll start seeing this year. Tim and team discuss: who would be good stewards of our music business while we work on the next big thing? Answer: Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre. If the $3.2 billion figure is true, it is still a quite small percentage of Apple’s cash flow, and gets the company a profitable business and a legitimate entry to the streaming market. Doesn’t seem irrational at all in this light. Yet all these supposedly insightful analysts can’t understand
Who would be good stewards of our music business? Certainly not these snake oil salesmen selling their bass-heavy, technically inferior, blinged up headphones for over-inflated prices. If these guys were true music industry visionaries, they’d have a massive empire by now and be worth way more than $3.2B
And what billion dollar businesses have you run lately, genius? I think I’d trust Jimmy Iovine’s music bona fides before yours.
Apple made 10.2 billion in profit last quarter (that’s net after expenses) so it’s like 3 billion a month.
So in one month Apple can pay the rumoured price for Beats …
since the pundits started talking about it a week ago to the supposed announcement date of WWDC Apple would have made the entire price…
Anyways the purchase is all rumours now, Apple has said nothing.
“greed to match employees’ charitable contributions up to $10,000 annually”
To be correct, charitable contributions match was already implemented under Steven Jobs.
Apple has grown since Steve Jobs died, so larger purchases make even less of a dent overall than they would have then. The competitive market has also changed. Whatever your opinion of Samsung, they are a competitor, so perhaps Apple need to do more to stay ahead than they did when Jobs was around. The music market has changed, there are different challenges, no one knows what Steve Jobs would or wouldn’t have done. Chances are he would have taken advice from trusted people – people like Tim Cook.
MDN’s take is getting old and no longer relevant or accurate.
“MacDailyNews Take: That’s a falsehood:
• iPhone was released 5 years, 7 months, and 19 days after iPod.
• iPad was released 2 years, 9 months, and 5 days after iPhone.
• Tim Cook has been Apple CEO for 2 years, 8 months, and 19 days.”
The iPod was announced 749 days after the iMac was announced.
The iPhone was announced 1904 days after the iPod.
The iPad was announced 1114 days after the iPhone.
The average is 1,255 days. It’s been 1,567 days since the iPad was announced.
Does anyone buy MDN’s story that absolutely no new products were in development between the time the iPad was announced and when Tim Cook took over so that the innovation clock really does restart the day Tim took over the CEO position permanently?
While I radically disagree with the “Apple can no longer innovate” and “Apple is doomed without Steve Jobs” crowds, MDN’s constant implication that the “innovation clock” restarts at zero the day Tim Cook took over is truly asinine. If products and new categories were not in development during Steve’s final days, then there was something drastically wrong. And if it were true (something that would shock me) then it was and is Tim’s responsibility to fix that immediately. Not fix it as soon as possible, but immediately!
Do I think something new is coming from Apple? Absolutely. I may be delusional, but that is what I believe. I believe Apple has the innovative talent and skill sets of any other 10 tech companies combined. I’m willing to wait until the maximum in the historical timeline has passed (15 April 2015) before I declare innovation dead at Apple. Yet, to quell the legion of naysayers, Apple would be much, much better off if they get some new category of devices kicked off well before the end of 2014!
All that said, MDN’s take has gotten old and only serves to inflame the anti Apple fan base once someone points out the inconsistent timeline MDN puts forth.
MDN take is merging two timelines. Tim Cook didn’t take over as CEO the day iPad was released. How many days has It been since iPad release? Now you have a timeline.
What snarky comment would you have if an Android apologist had posted such an incongruent statement?