It is a given that Apple is different, post Steve Jobs. Equity prices aren't everything, but Apple's stock price suggests investors are uncertain about the company's prospects, with Tim Cook as CEO. The comparison is unfair, in many ways.
Some of us would argue that although it largely is true "nobody is indispensable," it is not always true. Steve Jobs was an extremely unusual CEO. So would there be a regression to the mean, in terms of CEO "potential impact?" Almost certainly.
The issue is how well Apple can manage its future without Steve Jobs. In that regard, Cook argues that Apple will in the future have to rely on many contributions, with teams--and teamwork--more important than in the past.
That likely would be the only logical answer no matter who was running Apple.
Monday, June 3, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What "Boomers" Messed Up
Journalist Helen Andrews is not going to be popular with lots of readers of her book Boomers: The Men and Women Who Promised Freedom and De...
-
We have all repeatedly seen comparisons of equity value of hyperscale app providers compared to the value of connectivity providers, which s...
-
It really is surprising how often a Pareto distribution--the “80/20 rule--appears in business life, or in life, generally. Basically, the...
-
Financial analysts typically express concern when any firm’s customer base is too concentrated. Consider that, In 2024, CoreWeave’s top two ...
No comments:
Post a Comment