Apple CEO Tim Cook poised to get annual stock payout worth $279 million

Apple CEO Tim Cook is set to receive 560,000 Apple shares on Monday, worth $278.6 million as of Friday’s close — his annual take from a compensation award he received after succeeding Steve Jobs.

Apple CEO Tim Cook
Apple CEO Tim Cook
Anders Melin for Bloomberg News:

In late July, the company reported a record third quarter. The firm’s stock soared, pushing his net worth above $1 billion less than two weeks later. And, last week, Apple’s market value eclipsed $2 trillion.

His annual payouts are partly tied to continued service, while the remainder pays out in relation to how well Apple’s stock does relative to other companies in the S&P 500 index over three years.

As of Friday, the company’s return over that period, including reinvested dividends, was roughly 225%, better than the vast majority of firms in the index, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That puts him well above the threshold for the payout.

MacDailyNews Take: Last year, Tim Cook donated more than $5 million worth of Apple stock to an unspecified charity. Last week, according to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing, Cook again gifted more than $5 million worth of Apple stock (10,715 shares) to an unspecified charity.

He plans to give away all his wealth, after providing for the college education of his 10-year-old nephew. There should be plenty left over to fund philanthropic projects… Cook says that he has already begun donating money quietly, but that he plans to take time to develop a systematic approach to philanthropy rather than simply writing checks. — Adam Lashinsky, Fortune, March 26, 2015


  1. It is not about Tim Cook giving away all his wealth. It is that he is taking benefits out of proportion to the rights of shareholders. His job is to be the CEO. He has enormous responsibilities, although his basic salary is $3 million.

    For those on the political right, instances such as these make defence of the system more difficult. A wave of discontent is sweeping all western democracies – discontent with the market-based system and the way in which it allocates reward.

    If we are not careful, popular democracy will result in the increasing curtailing or even the dismantling of our market-based system. The risk of that is heightened by ordinary people seeing rewards such as this.

    1. As a shareholder I can say Tim Cook is worth every penny of his compensation. He’s as committed to Apple as anyone (and this is a company famous for creating a global army of deeply fervent fans) and his performance speaks for itself.

      During his time at Apple, shares have gone from $1 to $500 (on a split-adjusted basis). For almost half of that time (and generating far, far more than half of that value for shareholders) Tim was leading the company as CEO.

      1. He is really is not worth “every penny”. He might be worth $3 million per year. Possibly even $5 million. But not every penny of $279 million.

        $279 million.

        And even if you think that he is worth every penny, there are a sufficient number of hard workers and grafters who think that is too unreasonable to be permitted in a democracy. So you might think he is worth “every penny” – but you might have also have to think whether the weight of all those pennies might bring down the house on top of our heads.

    2. “For those on the political right, instances such as these make defence of the system more difficult. A wave of discontent is sweeping all western democracies – discontent with the market-based system and the way in which it allocates reward.”

      Discontent… nah. More like a lesser character developement of our fellow beings. What ever happened to being happy for someone elses good fortune, whether it is pay, promotion, getting that job, graduating with honors, working hard the past five summers and buying that first car and the model you always wanted? Why must one be “greedy” because they are handsomely rewarded or seem to have all the luck? It is not as if Tim Cook did not do his time and pay his dues. I bet the ones who are in that wave of discontent are discontent because they graduated college with their worthless four year degree and are surprised they are not in a position in a job that pays them a six figure salary right off the bat. However, if they were making six figures, you can bet that discontent with the market-based system and the way in which it allocates reward would not hold water if the roles were reversed and THEY were told they made too much money from a wave of discontented people making lesser means. Face it, some are too envious that others have gotten their fruits of their labor and they have not.

      And what does this have to do with “for those on the political right”? Don’t think for a second, there are those on the political left, just as handsomely rewarded, yet, just because they “talk” about championing the lot of less fortunate and create crappy feel good programs while telling those of lesser character, how they are going to stick it to the man and make sure they pay their fair share, that those on the left are somehow “protected” and are not hounded or questioned by the wave? Think about that. And even though doing so will not help one’s position who is less fortunate, the fact that financial pain is being brought upon someone who is doing well makes them smile. And isn’t that a disgusting trait to have and is what I mean by lesser character.

      1. I say that because I am on the political right and defend the market based system we have. I could live with the Anglosphere centre-left. I positively would oppose heavy market interference and regulation, high taxes and high government spending.

        But in order for that to work, people have to see that the market works for all of us. It is not “greed” to be concerned at one person receiving remuneration of $279 million, at the expense of the owners of the business – the shareholders. For too long, corporate bosses have been helping themselves to capital at the expense of ordinary shareholders who hold stocks in their savings and pensions.

        Not only is envy a realistic emotion for people to feel, it is also unhealthy for our economic system to cause it to be widely felt. This needs structural reform with respect to the power of shareholders and executive pay. It is too easy for non-executive directors to sit on each other’s boards awarding themselves disproportionate rewards each year. It is a sign of market failure.

  2. Personal philanthropy is not sustainable nor is it reliable because it’s a voluntary effort and up to the whims of wealthy dukes to fund needy causes/people. And there are not enough such dukes to cover all disadvantages. And the philanthropy is always biased, stacked for or against certain people/causes. These are reasons why funding needs to be systemic and ongoing. The mechanisms are in place already but vindictive members of Congress cut funding, wrongly citing the need for austerity which simply makes people poorer and the wealthy wealthier.

    On point, no single person, not even Apple’s Cook whose company produces wonderful products and services, no matter the reason should amass such a large disparity of wealth. I am always reminded about the lack of medical and dental that people have who I see living in tents and stick and tarp shelters along the river trail during my bicycle rides.

    1. “I am always reminded about the lack of medical and dental that people have who I see living in tents and stick and tarp shelters along the river trail during my bicycle rides.”

      Please tell us what you have done about this or are you waiting on government. Making someone wealthy, providing them a home, feeding their kids three solid meals a day is not the job of government, and quite frankly I would not want the table scraps from those in Congress or the Senate who have been there for 20 plus years and are walking away as millionaires while only on a $174,000 salary and two or more residences and the problems the people complain about that the politiians say they are going to fix are always there, election after election? Would love to see the politicians tax returns. Especially the charitable contribution part.

      From Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol, “Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir.”

      You can remove thousands and change it to millions. However, when idiot voters that keep returning their same idiot representation who are constantly failing at their jobs to “provide for the general welfare”, we will always have that Chales DIckens phrase, and, of course, it all depends on how you define the “general welfare” in our Constitution!

  3. Where equality is legislated, via law or mandate, no one is free. When it’s made “fair for all,” someone is ALWAYS treated unfairly.

    Where freedom is the pursued ideal, there will always be inequality.

    “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings.
    The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”

    1. The Left: lives with a permission to act and call as their own what’s in another’s back pocket.

      Where the f does that come from…and with no shame?

    2. I am continually surprised that Americans, in particular, posit the choice as being capitalism or socialism. And then conflate capitalism with disproportionate levels of pay and inequality – as if that is the objective of a market-based society rather than something to be minimised.

      Capitalism is not about the sharing of “blessings” but work and commensurate reward. Executive pay is out-of-kilter with what is commensurate – particularly with respect to the shareholders, who are all of us, who own the company and hold its stock in our savings or pensions.

      Socialism exists almost nowhere in Northern America or Europe. All have managed economies to a greater or lesser extent. The issue is the extent to which market structures are properly supported to ensure the greatest creation and earning of wealth for the largest number.

      And – as I have said before, extreme levels of executive pay, awarded by remuneration boards stuffed with each other’s directors means that a small group of people continually vote on each other’s pay, at the expense of shareholders. That is market failure.

      1. Ridiculous. Canada and England have socialized medicine (to a much greater extent than the USA, and yes, we should get rid of Medicare). Sweden has way higher taxes to give free stuff to people.

Reader Feedback

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