|
Post by larrydoyle on Feb 28, 2014 15:56:22 GMT -8
Here's what I think:
Apple is not a leftist organization. It is, as Wayne Gretzky used to say,. moving to where the puck is going, not where it is.
And not even that. Apple, and the stock, has been hammered in these last few years on human rights and environmental issues, hammered even when other companies did the same or worse.
It will benefit Apple, and AAPL, to be on the right side of these issues. And by that, I mean, not the Right side.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 28, 2014 15:56:53 GMT -8
When, exactly, Tim, did you factor in shareholder returns? I don't remember you hitting that bullet point in any earnings conference calls. OK Tim, get AAPL back to ATH's and I'll get the hell out of your social justice organization's stock. Why not sell now? You've held Apple for an extremely long time...you must be up significantly. If you no longer believe in the stock, sell now...who knows if it will ever reach an ATM again How about you go pass the Series 7 exam, then learn about my age, risk tolerance, time horizon, income needs, and tax situation, and then you can offer me financial planning advice, K?
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Feb 28, 2014 16:00:50 GMT -8
Excellent report, Luckychoices. Thanks.
Don't think we need to worry too much about "ROI". Gross margins are more than fine for now, even with the non-ROI-related initiatives Apple engages in (supply chain transparency, social responsibility - whatever one's opinion of it in the context of megacap corporations, etc.)
Any info on the board vote? Everyone sailed through?
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Feb 28, 2014 16:03:33 GMT -8
Luckychoices
Thanks for the brief.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Feb 28, 2014 16:07:50 GMT -8
Excellent report, Luckychoices. Thanks. Don't think we need to worry too much about "ROI". Gross margins are more than fine for now, even with the non-ROI-related initiatives Apple engages in (supply chain transparency, social responsibility - whatever one's opinion of it in the context of megacap corporations, etc.) Any info on the board vote? Everyone sailed through? Thanks, Mav & rickag. As for the board vote, I believe Andrea Jung had the lowest vote ~ 96%. Al Gore, I believe, was next lowest. The rest seemed to be all up around 98+%.
|
|
|
Post by mace on Feb 28, 2014 16:12:55 GMT -8
Tim Cook’s response, which he specified covered both environmental and human rights concerns, was something to the effect of, “If you want me to make decisions based on ROI only, you should get out of the stock…because many things will be done because they’re the right things to do”. This elicited a loud round of applause from most of those in attendance. I agree with TC and those shareholders who supported this view. Business has the moral obligations to improve quality of life. Btw, that doesn't mean I support Apple's position in all issues.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,431
|
Post by chinacat on Feb 28, 2014 16:35:02 GMT -8
If you no longer believe in the stock, sell now...who knows if it will ever reach an ATM again Yep, it sure did seem like a place you could go to just pull out cash for a while there...
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Feb 28, 2014 16:38:09 GMT -8
Excellent report, Luckychoices. Thanks. Don't think we need to worry too much about "ROI". Gross margins are more than fine for now, even with the non-ROI-related initiatives Apple engages in (supply chain transparency, social responsibility - whatever one's opinion of it in the context of megacap corporations, etc.) Any info on the board vote? Everyone sailed through? Thanks, Mav. As for the board vote, I believe Andrea Jung had the lowest vote ~ 96%. Al Gore, I believe, was next lowest. The rest seemed to be all up around 98+%. That board ain't going ANYWHERE. Shareholders are staying the course, though I'm sure iCahn "gave" them a few points here and there with his "backhanded" endorsement recently.
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Feb 28, 2014 16:53:31 GMT -8
Tim Cook’s response, which he specified covered both environmental and human rights concerns, was something to the effect of, “If you want me to make decisions based on ROI only, you should get out of the stock…because many things will be done because they’re the right things to do”. This elicited a loud round of applause from most of those in attendance. I agree with TC and those shareholders who supported this view. Business has the moral obligations to improve quality of life. Btw, that doesn't mean I support Apple's position in all issues. I agree as well. Maybe it's not a popular view in business but I appreciate Tim's ability to "Think Different" . He made it quite clear he does not care about the short term "Investor" (Gambler) .... I couldn't be happier with that comment.
|
|
|
Post by larrydoyle on Feb 28, 2014 17:22:34 GMT -8
Again, I think it's smart politics, and smart business.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2014 17:25:01 GMT -8
I appreciate Tim rejecting the Timid Tim persona and dishing it out. Also, I liked Tim telling the short term gamblers to GTFO, though nothing cures a gambler except going bankrupt. After Jim D. voted a "Nope" on a new Apple TV rumor, I bought one for work. I also bought some AAPL shares, to complement my purchase of hard assets (collectibles). The shares I bought have a strike price of $700 and they have no expiration.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2014 17:44:29 GMT -8
Why not sell now? You've held Apple for an extremely long time...you must be up significantly. If you no longer believe in the stock, sell now...who knows if it will ever reach an ATM again How about you go pass the Series 7 exam, then learn about my age, risk tolerance, time horizon, income needs, and tax situation, and then you can offer me financial planning advice, K? Well either sell or quit yapping about that you want to sell.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 28, 2014 18:13:47 GMT -8
How about you go pass the Series 7 exam, then learn about my age, risk tolerance, time horizon, income needs, and tax situation, and then you can offer me financial planning advice, K? Well either sell or quit yapping about that you want to sell. Or, how about I do whatever the fuck I want to do, and if you don't like it, you can lump it? Or put me on ignore.
|
|
|
Post by osx10 on Feb 28, 2014 18:38:51 GMT -8
In case you're curious about the group that attacked Tim Cook today, here is a copy of their press release from this afternoon. Whether you agree with them or not, I still take it as a positive that Tim Cook dropped the gloves and went back right at them. For Release: February 28, 2014 Contact: Judy Kent at (703) 759-7476 or jkent@nationalcenter.org or David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or (703) 568-4727 (text-enabled cell) or dalmasi@nationalcenter.org Tim Cook to Apple Investors: Drop Dead Apple CEO Tim Cook tells Investors Who Care More About Return on Investment than Climate Change: Your Money is No Longer Welcome As Board Member Al Gore Cheers the Tech Giant's Dedication to Environmental Activism, Investors Left to Wonder Just How Much Shareholder Value is Being Destroyed in Efforts to Combat "Climate Change" Free-Market Activist Presents Shareholder Resolution to Computer Giant Apple Calling for Transparency on Environmental Issues; Company Balks Cupertino, CA / Washington DC - At today's annual meeting of Apple shareholders in Cupertino, California, Apple CEO Tim Cook informed investors that are primarily concerned with making reasonable economic returns that their money is no longer welcome. The message came in response to the National Center for Public Policy Research's shareholder resolution asking the tech giant to be transparent about its environmental activism and a question from the National Center about the company's environmental initiatives. "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. Danhof also asked Apple CEO Tim Cook about the company's green energy pursuits. Danhof asked whether the company's environmental investments increased or decreased the company's bottom line. After initially suggesting that the investments make economic sense, Cook said the company would pursue environmental goals even if there was no economic point at all to the venture. Danhof further asked if the company's projects would continue to make sense if the federal government stopped heavily subsidizing alternative energy. Cook completely ignored the inquiry and became visibly agitated. Danhof went on to ask if Cook was willing to amend Apple's corporate documents to indicate that the company would not pursue environmental initiatives that have some sort of reasonable return on investment - similar to the concession the National Center recently received from General Electric. This question was greeted by boos and hisses from the Al gore contingency in the room. "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." "Although the National Center's proposal did not receive the required votes to pass, millions of Apple shareholders now know that the company is involved with organizations that don't appear to have the best interest of Apple's investors in mind," said Danhof. "Too often investors look at short-term returns and are unaware of corporate policy decisions that may affect long-term financial prospects. After today's meeting, investors can be certain that Apple is wasting untold amounts of shareholder money to combat so-called climate change. The only remaining question is: how much?" The National Center's shareholder resolution noted that " ome trade associations and business organizations have expanded beyond the promotion of traditional business goals and are lobbying business executives to pursue objectives with primarily social benefits. This may affect Company profitability and shareholder value. The Company's involvement and acquiescence in these endeavors lacks transparency, and publicly-available information about the Company's trade association memberships and related activities is minimal. An annual report to shareholders will help protect shareholder value."
Apple's full 2014 proxy statement is available here. The National Center's proposal, "Report on Company Membership and Involvement with Certain Trade Associations and Business Organizations," appears on page 60.
The National Center filed the resolution, in part, because of Apple's membership in the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA), one of the country's largest trade associations. In its 2013 "Retail Sustainability Report," RILA states: "Companies will often develop individual or industry voluntary programs to reduce the need for government regulations. If a retail company minimizes its waste generation, energy and fuel usage, land-use footprint, and other environmental impacts, and strives to improve the labor conditions of the workers across its product supply chains, it will have a competitive advantage when regulations are developed."
"This shows that rather than fighting increased government regulation, RILA is cooperating with Washington, D.C.'s stranglehold on American business in a misguided effort to stop so-called climate change," said Danhof. "That is not an appropriate role for a trade association."
For even more information on RILA, read "The Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA): A Cartel that Threatens Innovation and Competitiveness," by National Center Senior Fellow Dr. Bonner Cohen.
"Rather than opting for transparency, Apple opposed the National Center's resolution," noted Danhof. "Apple's actions, from hiring of President Obama's former head of the Environmental Protection Agency Lisa Jackson, to its investments in supposedly 100 percent renewable data centers, to Cook's antics at today's meeting, appear to be geared more towards combating so-called climate change rather than developing new and innovative phones and computers."
After Danhof presented the proposal, a representative of CalPERS rose to object and stated that climate change should be one of corporate America's primary concerns, and after she called carbon dioxide emissions a "mortal danger," Apple board member and former vice president Al Gore turned around and loudly clapped and cheered.
"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."
"Tim Cook, like every other American, is entitled to his own political views and to be an activist of any legal sort he likes on his own time," said Amy Ridenour, chairman of the National Center for Public Policy Research. "And if Tim Cook, private citizen, does not care that over 95 percent of all climate models have over-forecast the extent of predicted global warming, and wishes to use those faulty models to lobby for government policies that raise prices, kill jobs and retard economic growth and extended lifespans in the Third World, he has a right to lobby as he likes. But as the CEO of a publicly-held corporation, Tim Cook has a responsibility to, consistent with the law, to make money for his investors. If he'd rather be CEO of the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, he should apply."
"As in the past, Cook took but a handful of questions from the many shareholders present who were eager to ask a question at the one meeting a year in which shareholder questions are taken," added Ridenour, "leaving many disappointed. Environmentalism may be a byword at Apple, but transparency surely is not."
The National Center's Free Enterprise Project is a leading free-market corporate activist group. In 2013, Free Enterprise Project representatives attended 33 shareholder meetings advancing free-market ideals in the areas of health care, energy, taxes, subsidies, regulations, religious freedom, media bias, gun rights and many more important public policy issues. Today's Apple meeting was the National Center's third attendance at a shareholder meeting so far in 2014.
The National Center for Public Policy Research is an Apple shareholder, as are National Center executives.
The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations, and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 96,000 active recent contributors.
Contributions are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.
-30-
Send this email to a friend
Donate | Subscribe | Search | Home | Blog | Facebook | Twitter
Fighting for Liberty Since 1982
The National Center for Public Policy Research 501 Capitol Court, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002 (202) 543-4110 Fax (202) 543-5975 E-Mail: info@nationalcenter.org Web: www.nationalcenter.org
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 28, 2014 18:50:46 GMT -8
Maybe it's not a popular view in business but I appreciate Tim's ability to "Think Different" . He made it quite clear he does not care about the short term "Investor" (Gambler) .... I couldn't be happier with that comment. Putting aside the fact that the fiduciary duty of an inside director makes no distinctions between how long investors hold a stock, how about that medium term investor? If anything, he might be doing worse than the short term guy who is up the last 6 months. I've held for >20 years, so I qualify as a long termer, and I'm running out of patience with the guy. And if one more of you says, "then sell," I'll merrily groin punch you. I mean seriously, if that's the best you have to contribute, then please put me on ignore and do not read or respond to my posts. It is merely one click away, and I won't be cry, I promise. I wasn't aware that this was a cult, and we had to drink the Kool-Aid or leave. I thought we were supposed to disprove that sheep fanboy attack that Apple haters parrot. Stockholders have a right to hold directors accountable. For the record, I am 46, not 66, have no debt, no mortgage, no car payment, and I only have a dog depending on me. And I can barely get her to eat once a day. My only real expense is beer, and I'm trying to cut back on that. So, for now, I hold and wait for Tim to walk the talk. Corporations should be responsive to shareholders, not contemptuous of them. And nothing Cook said today (or on any conference call) made me feel any love, regardless of how long someone holds the stock. He obviously felt about today as an obligation, not a duty, and it comes off as arrogant. Jobs could be arrogant, because he was the greatest CEO of all time and he saved the company and gave some people 10,000% returns. Cook has yet to show he's even in the same league, so he should stow the arrogance until he performs something worthy of it. The company's revenues are flatlining and the stock hasn't done shit in 18 months. I wonder, if we go another year in the 500's, or two, how long does that "screw the short term investor" line work here? I'm not saying Apple is doomed. I'd just like the see Cook get as worked up about the stock price as he does his political views. Want to get mad and be an advocate? Then get mad at Wall Street's disrespect for your company. Or how about you at least just make more money every year? That would be great.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2014 18:58:19 GMT -8
Well either sell or quit yapping about that you want to sell. Or, how about I do whatever the fuck I want to do, and if you don't like it, you can lump it? Or put me on ignore. Strange...when others complain about the CEO or stock price, you're the first one to tell them what to do. Kettle = Pot?
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Feb 28, 2014 19:06:22 GMT -8
Maybe it's not a popular view in business but I appreciate Tim's ability to "Think Different" . He made it quite clear he does not care about the short term "Investor" (Gambler) .... I couldn't be happier with that comment. Putting aside the fact that the fiduciary duty of an inside director makes no distinctions between how long investors hold a stock, how about that medium term investor? If anything, he might be doing worse than the short term guy who is up the last 6 months. I've held for >20 years, so I qualify as a long termer, and I'm running out of patience with the guy. And if one more of you says, "then sell," I'll merrily groin punch you. I mean seriously, if that's the best you have to contribute, then please put me on ignore and do not read or respond to my posts. It is merely one click away, and I won't be cry, I promise. I wasn't aware that this was a cult, and we had to drink the Kool-Aid or leave. I thought we were supposed to disprove that sheep fanboy attack that Apple haters parrot. Stockholders have a right to hold directors accountable. For the record, I am 46, not 66, have no debt, no mortgage, no car payment, and I only have a dog depending on me. And I can barely get her to eat once a day. My only real expense is beer, and I'm trying to cut back on that. So, for now, I hold and wait for Tim to walk the talk. Corporations should be responsive to shareholders, not contemptuous of them. And nothing Cook said today (or on any conference call) made me feel any love, regardless of how long someone holds the stock. He obviously felt about today as an obligation, not a duty, and it comes off as arrogant. Jobs could be arrogant, because he was the greatest CEO of all time and he saved the company and gave some people 10,000% returns. Cook has yet to show he's even in the same league, so he should stow the arrogance until he performs something worthy of it. The company's revenues are flatlining and the stock hasn't done shit in 18 months. I wonder, if we go another year in the 500's, or two, how long does that "screw the short term investor" line work here? I'm not saying Apple is doomed. I'd just like the see Cook get as worked up about the stock price as he does his political views. Want to get mad and be an advocate? Then get mad at Wall Street's disrespect for your company. Or how about you at least just make more money every year? That would be great. Well I'm not sure if you are referring to me as I've never told you what to do with your shares .... In fact I couldn't care less what you do. Tim is doing what is best for Apple in the long run. Obviously he believes strongly in his convictions and feels that following them is a good long term plan for Apple. I happen agree with him since I believe I'm probably in the same camp politically it makes it much easier for me to be invested in Apple. Without starting another shit storm ... I would PERSONALLY find it difficult to invest in a company that operated in a manner I felt was detrimental to the greater good .... having said that it's a fine line... whatever works for you (Generically speaking) is what works for you. Now as for your comment JD ... I can't believe being an investor for so long that Apple's political positions surprise you ? And for the record that "Investor" is a Asshole ... just read the "press release" . I get a kick out of Tim basically telling him how irrelevant he is .. Now ... I'm actually hearing THUNDER for the first time in several years here in lovely Southern CA !!!!!
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,186
|
Post by JDSoCal on Feb 28, 2014 20:03:04 GMT -8
Or, how about I do whatever the fuck I want to do, and if you don't like it, you can lump it? Or put me on ignore. Strange...when others complain about the CEO or stock price, you're the first one to tell them what to do. Kettle = Pot? I recently said that when someone has divested completely of Apple, as CBingle recently did, they probably should consider the point of remaining here taunting people. I never even asked him to leave, and he was quite the PITA there at the end. I don't recall saying any current stockholder should not complain about the stock price in good faith. Even if I did, I reserve the right to change my opinions as the facts change. Apple's revenues have flatlined. Quite different from the halcyon days of 100% growth. I remain very long AAPL, so I have a right to bitch. But never fear, I am going to start a blog soon, so you may be spared my heresy soon enough. At least here. Maybe I can run into this garden of pure ideology once in a while, wearing a white Mac wife-beater, and swing a sledgehammer at the screen, if the Apple thought police don't catch me from behind. I promise not to wear the red dolphin shorts, however.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,431
|
Post by chinacat on Feb 28, 2014 20:40:35 GMT -8
Maybe I can run into this garden of pure ideology once in a while, wearing a white Mac wife-beater, and swing a sledgehammer at the screen, if the Apple thought police don't catch me from behind. I promise not to wear the red dolphin shorts, however. OK, but I request fair warning for those of us with delicate constitutions, with or without the shorts.
|
|