4 ms·

Unfortunately in free market capitalist system duty to shareholders takes priority over anything else. As long as you are not breaking the law (but even that ca

Unfortunately in free market capitalist system duty to shareholders takes priority over anything else. As long as you are not breaking the law (but even that can be solved by lobbying government to add loopholes to legislature), shareholders will be happy with anything you do which makes them more money. Do you suggest Apple leave Chinese market? I'm not sure Tim Cook could get away with that even if he wanted to. Board would replace him with CEO more aligned with profit oriented shareholders imho. Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs, he is certainly be replaceable.

forapurpose 9y ago
> in free market capitalist system duty to shareholders takes priority over anything else That's not actually true, though I agree that it is often repeated and there is pressure from shareholders and others. It's not and never has required absolute obedience; and IIRC even that idea in the theoretical sense was developed in the 1980s, long after the advent of large public companies. > Do you suggest Apple leave Chinese market? His choices are not so extreme. He doesn't have to show up at this conference, for example, or he can make a speech that promotes the freedom of the Chinese people. There are many other ways to navigate the situation; see my prior comment regarding that subject.
- richardknop 9y ago
  > He doesn't have to show up at this conference I agree. But that would be mostly meaningful gesture as it wouldn't change anything. > he can make a speech that promotes the freedom of the Chinese people This might be more meaningful and would actually mean he is putting something on the line / has skin in the game. Which is why I can't imagine Cook doing that. He would be putting Apple's business in China in danger by doing that. > There are many other ways to navigate the situation; see my prior comment regarding that subject. Yes, but the more meaningful actions Cook / Apple could take, the more likely it would damage their business. So it is against their interest to do anything other than empty gestures.
  - forapurpose 9y ago
    >> He doesn't have to show up at this conference > I agree. But that would be mostly meaningful gesture as it wouldn't change anything. I disagree about its impact. He legitimizes the oppression of the Chinese people with his presence; he says 'this is ok'. > it is against their interest to do anything other than empty gestures It is against their immediate financial interest; my whole point is that there are other interests too.

forapurpose 9y ago

> in free market capitalist system duty to shareholders takes priority over anything else That's not actually true, though I agree that it is often repeated and there is pressure from shareholders and others. It's not and never has required absolute obedience; and IIRC even that idea in the theoretical sense was developed in the 1980s, long after the advent of large public companies. > Do you suggest Apple leave Chinese market? His choices are not so extreme. He doesn't have to show up at this conference, for example, or he can make a speech that promotes the freedom of the Chinese people. There are many other ways to navigate the situation; see my prior comment regarding that subject.

richardknop 9y ago
> He doesn't have to show up at this conference I agree. But that would be mostly meaningful gesture as it wouldn't change anything. > he can make a speech that promotes the freedom of the Chinese people This might be more meaningful and would actually mean he is putting something on the line / has skin in the game. Which is why I can't imagine Cook doing that. He would be putting Apple's business in China in danger by doing that. > There are many other ways to navigate the situation; see my prior comment regarding that subject. Yes, but the more meaningful actions Cook / Apple could take, the more likely it would damage their business. So it is against their interest to do anything other than empty gestures.
- forapurpose 9y ago
  >> He doesn't have to show up at this conference > I agree. But that would be mostly meaningful gesture as it wouldn't change anything. I disagree about its impact. He legitimizes the oppression of the Chinese people with his presence; he says 'this is ok'. > it is against their interest to do anything other than empty gestures It is against their immediate financial interest; my whole point is that there are other interests too.