

Is Apple Looking For A Replacement For CEO Cook? - jeremylevy
http://www.forbes.com/sites/genemarcial/2013/04/21/is-apple-looking-for-a-replacement-for-ceo-cook/

======
jacobparker
"But if it isn’t yet pursuing such a goal, it should"

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridges_law_of_headlines>

"This story is a great demonstration of my maxim that any headline which ends
in a question mark can be answered by the word "no." The reason why
journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably
bollocks, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but
still want to run it."

------
quesera
The only tenable premise here is that the market had priced ridiculous future
growth into Apple, which is now leaking out due to reduced confidence in same.

The problems are: Apple's valuation was never optimistic (rather pessimistic
compared to peers).. Apple's growth has barely slowed since Cook took over
(we'll know more on Tuesday), but regardless Apple is still well ahead of the
rest of the industry.. And the "fix" would be to bring in someone else who
would restore the market's faith in Apple's return to ridiculous future
growth...because there's _a single CEO anywhere_ who could do that.

Apple's board is too smart to whipsaw around due to quarterly market drama.
Cook is the right choice, though not alone. The mgt team at Apple is solid.

Sentiment is fickle and temporary. Numbers will eventually rationalize. Apple
can afford to wait.

------
corin_
When will people stop paying attention to Forbes and their badly vetted
contributors? I'm as foolish as anyone, every time I get linked to a Forbes
piece and only while reading it do I remember how bad most of their content
is.

As pointed out by one comment on that piece, the biggest error the contributor
includes is "Apple’s stock has lost about half of its market value since
October 2011, when he took over as CEO". In actual fact, Cook took over as CEO
in August when the the price was $376.18, lower than it is right now at
$390.53.

I'm sure there are arguments to be made that Cook should be replaced (not
saying they are or aren't the right arguments), but they shouldn't be made by
someone who screws up the facts that badly, whether it was a mistake or just
talking shit to fit his story.

~~~
gnaffle
Not only that, but he was interim CEO for quite some time before that.

------
joelrunyon
_> The Street’s bullish stance is astonishing considering that some $290
billion of Apple’s market value has been wiped out in just six months. Of the
37 analysts from major securities firms who follow Apple, none has downgraded
the stock to a sell, according to available data from MSN.com. But 25 of them
still recommend the stock as a “strong buy” and six others rate it as
“moderate buy.” Another six Apple watchers rate the stock as a hold.

One of the chief reasons why these analysts continue to favor the stock is
Apple’s huge cash pile, estimated at more than $137 billion, and what the
company could do with it to win back the thickening crowd of disappointed and
displeased investors. And strong demand for Apple’s innovative products has
continued, led by the iPhone and iPad. And speculation persists that soon
Apple will announce another new must-have product, which should help the stock
recoup its sharp decline._

So essentially, despite no good reasons for the price to drop, the stock price
is dropping because analysts are afraid the stock price is dropping regardless
of what the company is actually doing. Now, because of that, those same
analysts want to get rid of the CEO that basically engineered Apple's ability
to make ridiculous margins on through their operating systems efficiency. This
is absurd. Does anyone else want these analysts to just shut up?

------
crag
"Some Wall Street sources close to some Apple executives..."

In other words, my sister's brother's cousin. What a trash piece. Just in
place to grab a view extra page views.

------
kayoone
I dont really think they do. Apple is smart enough to know that no other CEO
can turn that trend around. Its not the CEOs fault anyway, how can anyone
follow up Steve Jobs run without the hyped stock price taking a hit?

They still have been tremendously successful in the last 2 years but stock
price is irrational anyway. I doubt there currently is anyone with similar
experience and understanding of Steves vision than Cook. Some might say Ive,
but i dont think he is the type of guy for a CEO position of this size and he
already is at the very top of the company anyway.

------
threeseed
The hilarity of all of this is that the current product pipeline was signed
off by Steve Jobs whilst he was alive. And the same people (except for
Forstall) are still there plugging away.

But that said Apple just needs to follow the iPod strategy for the iPhone/iPad
and they will continue to pour in the cash. By that I mean products at lower
price points but still maintaining the same premium aesthetic.

Also I would stake my life that Apple WILL release a TV. But it will be 4K and
coincide with a "H.265 across the company" strategy.

~~~
uptown
Totally agree. I believe they're waiting till 4K reaches a price that will
sell - which is just beginning to happen (
[http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/15/seiki-offcially-prices-
it...](http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/15/seiki-offcially-prices-
its-50-inch-4k-tv-at-1500-for-late-april/) ). It's the only realistic way they
can offer a future-proofed device that will look great for an extended period
of time as more 4k content becomes available.

------
venomsnake
One of the things the punditry never stops to deliver is flip floping
following the trend. Apple is no different company now that it was a year ago.

While apple bashing is all the rage now, the (supposed) problems it is having
are the same as the day Cook took the office.

While I would enjoy tremendously the fall of apple (and any other walled
garden) I would prefer too see it on the basis of failed ideology than mass
market psychosis.

