• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Apple's Tim Cook: Business isn’t just about making a profit

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
He leads a company that some would consider the epitome of ruthless global capitalism. But Apple chief executive Tim Cook has shocked some in the US with an impassioned attack on the single-minded pursuit of profit – and a direct appeal to climate-change deniers not to buy shares in his firm.

Eyewitnesses said Cook, who succeeded Steve Jobs as boss of the technology giant in 2011, was visibly angry as he took on a group of right-wing investors during a question-and-answer session at a shareholders’ meeting.

Responding to calls from the National Centre for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), a conservative think tank and investor, for Apple to refrain from putting money in green energy projects that were not profitable, he shot back that Apple did “a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive”. The chief executive added: “We want to leave the world better than we found it.”

Apple's Tim Cook: Business isn

Well, that's what shareholders want to hear....Your investment isn't about making a profit....So, I wonder now how long before Apple becomes yet another 'used to be' on the trash heap of good companies ran into the ground by poor businessmen with stupid ideas?
 
Well, that's what shareholders want to hear....Your investment isn't about making a profit
The word "just" (Which is absent from the quote but present in the title) is really important here.
 
That's a bit shocking considering the CEO has a very real fiduciary duty to investors/stockholders. I mean, breaching that means jail time.

If the fruitloops at Apple want to fund non-starters, they can do so out of personal funds, they shouldn't be dipping into the company till. How is this not a matter for the SEC?
 
The word "just" (Which is absent from the quote but
present in the title) is really important here.


LOL !!

Its real easy to push that "profit isn't all that matters " rhetoric when your stock is proced at 524.00 bucks a share.
 
LOL !!

Its real easy to push that "profit isn't all that matters " rhetoric when your stock is proced at 524.00 bucks a share.

With this guy at the helm, it might be affordable soon! :lamo
 
He could well lose his job for making those statements. But I will take his advice. I promise not to buy any Apple stock. Actually, I despise Apple the company so I wouldn't buy it anyway.
 
Right wings get absolutely irate when you suggest profit isn't the only motivation to do anything. :lamo

Although if profit isn't the only motivation, why do their computers have the hardware marked up 200%?

i should also point out that thinking "green energy isn't profitable" is a short sighted idea.
 
Well, that's what shareholders want to hear....Your investment isn't about making a profit....So, I wonder now how long before Apple becomes yet another 'used to be' on the trash heap of good companies ran into the ground by poor businessmen with stupid ideas?

Further it has been widely reported that Cook bluntly told the shareholders that if they didn't like his more 'liberal' views on how to run the company, they should get out of the stock. Not exactly what the shareholders want to hear. Apple dipped well below $500 in early January, did recover, but was down to $522 today the last time I looked and will probably slide some more because the market is taking a major hit overall today. If Apple stocks continue their downward trend overall, I think we can expect to see another change at the top relatively soon.

But there are some speculators that say Apple is primed to soar this year. We'll see how it goes. I don't have any Apple stock and would not want to take that risk.
 
This thread takes a real situation, to which Cook was responding, and distills it down to a myopic partisan argument devoid of any real substance.

This "incident" isn't a commentary on an executive's fiduciary duty, an indication that Cook has gone off the reservation in respect to his duty to his shareholders, or a general commentary on a corporation's responsibilities in general.

What happened here is that over the course of Cook's tenure as chief executive at Apple he's made an effort to move the company to a more sustainable energy infrastructure.

Neither Cook nor Apple are unique in this pursuit.

Most Fortune 500 companies have policies and programs related to issues that aren't, strictly speaking, focused on driving profit.

Such policies and programs run the gamut from expanded use of renewable/green energy, reinvestment in local disadvantaged communities, support for Veterans, diversity initiatives, monetary contributions to foreign disaster relief efforts, and on and on...

Generally none of this stuff is a major issue for the majority of shareholders.

It comes up from time to time where you'll have "activist investors" pushing some agenda or another but it rarely makes the mainstream news.

And the same actually applies in this case, except it did make the news this time.

What happened was this...

An institutional Apple investor, the The National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), got a measure placed on the 2014 proxy statement related to the disclosure to shareholders by Apple (in the form of an annual report) of Apple's involvement with trade organizations, including membership fees paid to such organizations, that focus on sustainable energy issues.

At the Annual General Meeting (AGM) Apple shareholders voted on the measure and choose to reject the NCPPR's measure.

Later, representatives of the NCPPR in attendance at the AGM, decided to try to put the screws to Cook and he pretty much told them flat out, "Listen, you guys are partisan idiots. We do plenty of things here at Apple that don't focus primarily on turning a profit and our investment in renewable energy, and our participation in organizations dedicated to renewable energy issues, are just a few of those thing. You put your measure on our ballot, our shareholders voted on that measure, and your measure was rejected. The people have spoken. If you disagree with the direction the leadership and the ownership of this company choose to take it, don't let the door hit you in the ass."

To turn this into a commentary on anything more than the specific situation in question is disingenuous.

(To read the actual proposal that was voted down by Apple's owners see this link: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/320193/000119312513486406/d648739dpre14a.htm - refer to Proposal No. 9)
 
Profit as the only objective is the mentality of the cartels.
 
Just another reason my pc is windows based and my phone is running android. I really dislike apple
 
Right wings get absolutely irate when you suggest profit isn't the only motivation to do anything. :lamo

Although if profit isn't the only motivation, why do their computers have the hardware marked up 200%?

i should also point out that thinking "green energy isn't profitable" is a short sighted idea.

Context Duece. This guy's number one duty in his job is, you guessed it, making a profit for the shareholders. Of course shareholders would be irate, he just admitted he's not doing his job and further admits he's throwing the company's money away.

They have the insane markup they have because they have been proprietary from the beginning and they can charge whatever they want. It helps make up for their historic lack in market share.

And Cook, who has plenty of his own money is more than welcome to throw his money away on these projects.
 
Context Duece. This guy's number one duty in his job is, you guessed it, making a profit for the shareholders. Of course shareholders would be irate, he just admitted he's not doing his job and further admits he's throwing the company's money away.

They have the insane markup they have because they have been proprietary from the beginning and they can charge whatever they want. It helps make up for their historic lack in market share.

And Cook, who has plenty of his own money is more than welcome to throw his money away on these projects.

I would suggest that the vast majority of those shareholders are satisfied. I've owned stock in Apple since like 2005 so I say keep up the good ****in work!
 
I would suggest that the vast majority of those shareholders are satisfied.

Not the bar he has to meet where it comes to his legal and fuduciary duty. But I will note soot's post, which if accurate let's him off malfeasance charges (don't know if the quotes are what Cook actually said or the article author's take on it).

If this was up for shareholder vote and the one side lost only to further complain about it now, that is not Cook's fault.
 
There's a difference between profit being the primary thing and "only" thing. Any company that forgets to build a strong corporate structure around value is time limited.
 
Considering that Apple's margins and profits have been falling for over a year now, and its once dominance in both the phone and tablet markets are gone and wont come back.. then I think he is laying the land for less spectacular but steady profits and hence dividends than what Apple investors are use too.

If the rumours are correct and Apple's big push into China has been an utter failure, and with the market share numbers and sales numbers that are out.. then Apple is in serious trouble in the medium and long run and need another "next big thing". There is a lot of dejavu with the old Mac vs PC wars in the 1980s, with Apple losing yet again. They will struggle to keep high margins and high prices as people realize more and more you dont need a 650 dollar iPhone or 500 dollar iPad to do the things they want. And if the US carriers get their way and get rid of the subsidy schemes, then Apple will be in serious trouble. Not a lot of American's can afford a 700 dollar phone...and the US is the only market where Apple has a major marketshare to defend.. it has given up the rest of the planet pretty much.

Now the question is going to be .. what is the next big thing from Apple.. and that is the real big 1 billion dollar question. iWatch? Doubt it, wearable tech is more hype than reality. Plus Android wearable tech is already out there and not exactly having mind boggling sales, although that might change with the Samsung Fit. Apple TV.. suicide, since the typical margin for Apple products would mean that they would have to sell a 40% more expensive TV than their competitors. I mean no one in their right mind will pay 1000 dollars for a TV when a similar tv can be gotten at 600 dollars.

Then what is there... we shall see.., but considering the mythical innovation out of Apple has all but dried up since it came out with the iPad 4 years ago.. then well.
 
Not the bar he has to meet where it comes to his legal and fuduciary duty. But I will note soot's post, which if accurate let's him off malfeasance charges (don't know if the quotes are what Cook actually said or the article author's take on it).

If this was up for shareholder vote and the one side lost only to further complain about it now, that is not Cook's fault.

I'm going to go ahead and suggest that Cook knows how to make a profit better than this writer, or you. Image is a big part of how Apple gets away with their prices. An image targeting the liberal hippie college students.

If you are a shareholder, go ahead and press charges. See if you can convince any judge or jury on the planet that freaking Apple isn't profitable enough.
 
Well, that's what shareholders want to hear....Your investment isn't about making a profit....So, I wonder now how long before Apple becomes yet another 'used to be' on the trash heap of good companies ran into the ground by poor businessmen with stupid ideas?

Actually Mr.Cook is partially right, and the NCPPR is partially wrong. Cook is right that profit is NOT businesses ONLY focus, NCPPR is right that business needs to make a profit. Jack Welch who invented shareholder value management style where the focus is almost exclusively about profit, has come to realize of late he was wrong. The focus should be on the long term health of the business and customer service. This means that sometimes taking short term loss for long term gain. It means much longer term thinking. Those green projects may not have a short term payoff, the payoff may be in the knowledge and the application for later more refined and profitable approach. The ideas may be stupid short term, its the long term were they may be brilliant. Business is about balance, short term, long term, profit now, profit later.
 
I'm going to go ahead and suggest that Cook knows how to make a profit better than this writer, or you. Image is a big part of how Apple gets away with their prices. An image targeting the liberal hippie college students.

If you are a shareholder, go ahead and press charges. See if you can convince any judge or jury on the planet that freaking Apple isn't profitable enough.

Try to at least read the posts you're responding to.

That said, even though you're responding to something I did not say, you still get it wrong. Doesn't matter what this writer or myself could do in terms of making a profit. If Cook said what the author of the OP said he did, he's derelict in HIS duty. However, as I noted soot posted more about the incident. If the author of soot's article is correct, what Cook actually said was materially different than what the OP article claims.
 
Try to at least read the posts you're responding to.

That said, even though you're responding to something I did not say, you still get it wrong. Doesn't matter what this writer or myself could do in terms of making a profit. If Cook said what the author of the OP said he did, he's derelict in HIS duty. However, as I noted soot posted more about the incident. If the author of soot's article is correct, what Cook actually said was materially different than what the OP article claims.

No, it wouldn't be. Isn't just about making a profit. Had he said "Isn't about making a profit," you might have an argument.
 
No, it wouldn't be. Isn't just about making a profit. Had he said "Isn't about making a profit," you might have an argument.

The CEOs PRIMARY duty is to make a profit. But once again, see soot's post, it shows what he did say and shows the context, and it is materially different than what the OP portrays.
 
Well, that's what shareholders want to hear....Your investment isn't about making a profit....So, I wonder now how long before Apple becomes yet another 'used to be' on the trash heap of good companies ran into the ground by poor businessmen with stupid ideas?

Much ado about nothing.

Nice spin and smoke, though.
 
The CEOs PRIMARY duty is to make a profit. But once again, see soot's post, it shows what he did say and shows the context, and it is materially different than what the OP portrays.

The CEO's primary duty is to increase shareholder value, a concept much more complex than simply making a profit. Making a profit in one year can be more than wiped out by fines and penalties in later years for what it took to make that years profit.
 
The topic on discussion was Apple's use of renewable energy projects on its bottom line, and pressure to embrace profit-only. Apple, like many other companies, had discovered a certain niche in being able to succeed both financially and with public relations when it embraced portions of the green movement's message. For the longest time Apple was dinged by such advocates for not making their products green enough. They sought to turn that image around, and have done a moderately successful job of doing so.
 
Context Duece. This guy's number one duty in his job is, you guessed it, making a profit for the shareholders. Of course shareholders would be irate, he just admitted he's not doing his job and further admits he's throwing the company's money away.

Throwing the company's money away is not exactly what people have been complaining about for the past few years. Quite the opposite, in fact. People have been wanting to see Apple use its incredibly massive bank for something or to give that money back.
 
Back
Top Bottom