Shots fired from Tim cook to ncppr rep.

[ShiverMePenguins]

Quoted article:

During Apple's annual shareholder's meeting today, CEO Tim Cook angrily rebuffed a representative from the National Center for Public Policy Research or NCPPR -- a conservative think tank -- that asked the company to disclose the costs of its sustainability programs, such as solar energy facilities, and to embrace a corporate policy that focused on profits above all else.

The representative asked Cook about the impact of the company's renewable energy programs on its bottom line, and also asked Cook to commit to only undertaking projects that were explicitly profitable.

The CEO did not take this well, according to a report from MacObserver, which said that Cook's body language changed significantly and his gentle and controlled speaking style gave way to a rapid-fire response.

What ensued was the only time I can recall seeing Tim Cook angry, and he categorically rejected the worldview behind the NCPPR's advocacy. He said that there are many things Apple does because they are right and just, and that a return on investment (ROI) was not the primary consideration on such issues.

"When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind," he said, "I don't consider the bloody ROI." He said that the same thing about environmental issues, worker safety, and other areas where Apple is a leader.

Finally, Cook looked at the questioner and said "if you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock."

Following the meeting, the NCPPR released an incendiary press release that is heavily critical of Cook, claiming that shareholder value is destroyed in favor of efforts to combat climate change.

I find this extremely admirable from Mr Cook to publically stand for the companies stated goals and refused to cut down costs to maintain a return on investment. For him to state that he doesn't care about such things when performing moral actions is profound in the business industry today. To also suggest to a major shareholder that they stop investing is a slap in a supposed conservative group in the face.

Yes yes I know, you all blindly hate apple with your stereotypical its overpriced responses. Meanwhile please walk up to a Bentley owner and tell them you hate their car kthxbai.

Sources:

http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-rejects-politics-of-the-ncppr-suggests-group-sell-apples-shttp://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/28/tim-cook-angrily-rejects-ncppr-proposal/

http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Apple_Tim_Cook_Climate_022814.htmlhttp://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/28/tim-cook-angrily-rejects-ncppr-proposal/

[dizmo]

I don't hate Apple for their products or pricing. I hate them for the way they conduct themselves. Evading billions of dollars in tax that should be paid, as well as suing anyone they can.

Filing a lawsuit because a screen jiggles a certain way when you reach the bottom is, quite frankly, sad.

Every company has good sides and bad sides.

 

Actually I do hate one Apple product. That mouse the had with the G3 (I think it was). That pebble thing caused my hands a lot of pain.

 

Also a Bentley is an over priced Volkswagen
Give me a Rolls.

[Jobbe03]

Not that many people blindly hate Apple on this forum. 

[paulsterio]

There are two sides to the argument. 

 

1) Yes, it was a good thing for Tim Cook to do to stand up for his company and the good and moral things they do. 

 

2) It was unwarranted to get angry over a question, however, it wasn't' as if they were telling him what to do, I think the question was a reasonable one and as a shareholder, they are allowed to make that request. What he has effectively done is negatively impact APPL's share price, which is something a CEO should never do. 

 

At the end of the day, it's probably something small that is blown out of proportion, CEOs and their shareholders disagreeing happen on a daily basis in the business world, it's just "news" cause it's Apple. 

[Andrew0472]

I don't hate Apple for their products or pricing. I hate them for the way they conduct themselves. Evading billions of dollars in tax that should be paid, as well as suing anyone they can.

Filing a lawsuit because a screen jiggles a certain way when you reach the bottom is, quite frankly, sad.

Every company has good sides and bad sides.

 

Actually I do hate one Apple product. That mouse the had with the G3 (I think it was). That pebble thing caused my hands a lot of pain.

 

Also a Bentley is an over priced Volkswagen

Give me a Rolls.

although i agree with some of the patent/lawsuit bullshit that apple is known for, evading tax is done by many business including google but no one ever mentions it so that is a little biased. 

[dizmo]

although i agree with some of the patent/lawsuit bullshit that apple is known for, evading tax is done by many business including google but no one ever mentions it so that is a little biased. 

True, but none of the other companies afaik have had a senate panel set up to investigate them.

Maybe they just haven't been caught, but I think it's just underhanded and wrong for a company to be so "designed in America" yet screw the people out of tax dollars.

Granted most of it would have been pissed away anyway, but some would have helped citizens.

[Andrew0472]

True, but none of the other companies afaik have had a senate panel set up to investigate them.

Maybe they just haven't been caught, but I think it's just underhanded and wrong for a company to be so "designed in America" yet screw the people out of tax dollars.

Granted most of it would have been pissed away anyway, but some would have helped citizens.

its all through loopholes within the tax laws which makes it legal in most cases yet immoral. However authorities are always trying to close the loopholes in order to make it illegal. Its frustrating i agree

[LAwLz]

I thinks it's hilarious how he tries to pretend like Apple has morals by starting to talk about how they help blind people. Typical argumentum ad passiones.

[mr moose]

worker safety, and other areas where Apple is a leader.

 

 

Yeah, like how many people have jumped from foxconn buildings because of apples worker safety policies? 

 

EDIT: and I also think the number of people who hate apple blindly on this forum is quite low, most have a valid reason for their distaste.

[totjup5]

I'm glad this happened, good for him for standing up for the company. Most of the time shareholders are terrible for a company in the long run. They just care about getting their money fast and getting out.

[ShiverMePenguins]

Foxconn isn't apple. And no, I do not believe most have a valid reason to disparage against a company nor their user base. They just ride the hype train.

Yeah, like how many people have jumped from foxconn buildings because of apples worker safety policies? 

 

EDIT: and I also think the number of people who hate apple blindly on this forum is quite low, most have a valid reason for their distaste.

[mr moose]

Foxconn isn't apple. And no, I do not believe most have a valid reason to disparage against a company nor their user base. They just ride the hype train.

Um.  foxconn is contracted to make a lot of apples stuff, don't you read the news?

 

http://inhabitat.com/apple-and-foxconn-commit-to-improving-safety-and-working-conditions-in-china/

 

And in this forum when you read apple hate posts, most people (not all I'll grant but most) actually post a reason for their hate. It is usually either because of their activities in the courts or because their hardware is overpriced, but at the end of the day that is a valid reason.

[Echodamus]

Blindly hate Apple? No, they have enough reason to be hated, there is no blind hatred needed. Its not just about their overpriced stuff, they have caused more significant damage than just having overprice/underperforming products. 

[minimalist]

Um.  foxconn is contracted to make a lot of apples stuff, don't you read the news?

 

http://inhabitat.com/apple-and-foxconn-commit-to-improving-safety-and-working-conditions-in-china/

 

And in this forum when you read apple hate posts, most people (not all I'll grant but most) actually post a reason for their hate. It is usually either because of their activities in the courts or because their hardware is overpriced, but at the end of the day that is a valid reason.

 

Just because apple has huge contracts with foxconn doesn't mean foxconn is apple though.  

[Ertman]

Following a purely ROI agenda, can lead to poor business decisions, that will actually hurt profitability.

Seems less NCCPR is less of a think tank, but a group that does their thinking while tanked.

[Ertman]

I was going to respond to the 'not that many blindly hate Apple' statement, but I would be wrong. I agree most do not blindly hate Apple, some have very good reasons, but most do not develop this opinion on their own and are just influenced and repeating what they are told.

[ShiverMePenguins]

wow, i didn't know foxconn was the same exact company. oh wait.

Um.  foxconn is contracted to make a lot of apples stuff, don't you read the news?

 

http://inhabitat.com/apple-and-foxconn-commit-to-improving-safety-and-working-conditions-in-china/

 

And in this forum when you read apple hate posts, most people (not all I'll grant but most) actually post a reason for their hate. It is usually either because of their activities in the courts or because their hardware is overpriced, but at the end of the day that is a valid reason.

[Ertman]

True, but none of the other companies afaik have had a senate panel set up to investigate them.

Maybe they just haven't been caught, but I think it's just underhanded and wrong for a company to be so "designed in America" yet screw the people out of tax dollars.

Granted most of it would have been pissed away anyway, but some would have helped citizens.

They had a senate panel because Apple was successful, raking in billions, and being made an example of, not because their direct actions.

  

There are two sides to the argument. 

 

1) Yes, it was a good thing for Tim Cook to do to stand up for his company and the good and moral things they do. 

 

2) It was unwarranted to get angry over a question, however, it wasn't' as if they were telling him what to do, I think the question was a reasonable one and as a shareholder, they are allowed to make that request. What he has effectively done is negatively impact APPL's share price, which is something a CEO should never do. 

 

At the end of the day, it's probably something small that is blown out of proportion, CEOs and their shareholders disagreeing happen on a daily basis in the business world, it's just "news" cause it's Apple.

2) To get angry over this single question does seem over the top, but what we don't know is if there is anymore to it. A CEOs performance should not be measured by a single metric such as stock price, especially given the stock and the market volatility.

Yes it likely is just news because it's Apple.

[Ertman]

I thinks it's hilarious how he tries to pretend like Apple has morals by starting to talk about how they help blind people. Typical argumentum ad passiones.

That wasn't the point.

[Jaybird]

I bet a blind person doesnt hate apple

[dizmo]

They had a senate panel because Apple was successful, raking in billions, and being made an example of, not because their direct actions.

 

 

My point still stands.

[Ertman]

My point still stands.

If you say so, but personally I think laws should be applied evenly and fairly.

[Suika]

This doesn't make up for the fact that they're trying to destroy competition by sueing everyone over everything.

Rounded corners on a phone? You aren't that original, Apple.

Tim Cook has a lot more to make up for if he wants Apple to look morally correct, and this is only a start, not a full apology to the world.

[dizmo]

If you say so, but personally I think laws should be applied evenly and fairly.

Yeah you're right. Everyone should just go through the same loophole, so that even more taxes are avoided.

[Xorbot]

Not that many people blindly hate Apple on this forum. 

 

Dat profile pic, tho.