A number of market watchers have suggested that Apple should let CEO Tim Cook go. Here's what the Macalope thinks about that.
The Macalope's not sure what to make of The Street's Rocco Pendola. With hair like Pendola has, sometimes the Macalope thinks he should make a rug.
Pendola seems to run hot and cold on Apple. He's kind of the Harvey Dent of Apple opinion-making. The horny one would not be going out on a limb to say that the coin landed scar-face-up this time.
A few weeks ago, the "fire Tim Cook" bandwagon appeared to be gaining steam.
Yes, inasmuch as steam is hot air, that is correct.
Then Apple followed through on lame promises, spewing the most hollow of band-aid approaches - an increased dividend and stock buyback.
Kind of depends on what the fuss was about, doesn't it? Was it about Apple fundamentals or was it about Apple sitting, Smaug-like, on a giant horde of treasure?
No, seriously, what was the fuss about? Because the Macalope has absolutely no idea.
They provide a lift and some sort of relatively shaky floor, but they do nothing - at least nothing we should perceive as a tonic - to alleviate the root issues at Apple. Matters dealing with long-term innovation - the ability to do something other than improve (or so we hope) existing products and services - under Tim Cook.
This is all material we covered last term, Rocco. Despite the fanciful imaginations of some, Apple under Steve Jobs did not ship a new product category every quarter, or even every year. It was six years between the iPod and the iPhone and then three years between the iPhone and the iPad. We've only just hit the three-year mark since the iPad, and Tim Cook has promised, basically right on schedule, that the company will ship new products in the fall.
Pendola's not wrong that Apple's fundamentals haven't changed since last month. But we shall have to agree to disagree that the company's fundamentals mean Cook should be fired.
(Which is a nice way of saying that suggestion is cuckoo bananas.)
What happened to consistency of opinion during times of insignificant news flow?
Consistency of opinion? In tech coverage? Are you new here or something?
And, at the moment, there's no question, Apple is just fine.
But its CEO should be fired.
When you have a declarative sentence in your column that completely undermines your headline, that should be a tip that something is amiss.
But resting on that is like handing the Rangers game seven of their NHL playoff series against the Capitals because they won game six.
[Please note: this is a hockey metaphor. Suddenly the hair makes more sense.]
Google (GOOG) is coming.
Suffice it to say they look a little less scary than Omar Little with Google Glass on their faces. Believing that only Google has big plans while Apple is standing still is a rather stunning denial of not only history but also probability.
Putting all of its platforms together to build an ecosystem that could one day crush Apple.
"Could." Why is it that Google's "coulds" are always taken more seriously than Apple's "have done dozens of times"?
Anyhow, shoot the messenger.
No, no, shooting is too violent. How about pantsing? Or wedgie-ing? Let's just wedgie the messenger.
Tim Cook has done nothing at AAPL, qualitatively, to warrant this recent pop.
Indeed. He had also done nothing to warrant the two quarter decline, either, though, so ...