6 ms·

Does anyone else want to write that comment? Fine. I'll do it. Is anyone else irked that some rich guy is getting even more connections in exchange for a huge

Does anyone else want to write that comment? Fine. I'll do it. Is anyone else irked that some rich guy is getting even more connections in exchange for a huge wad of cash, yet this is given the name (see: website name) of "charity"? When rich people give society back the money they stole, in exchange for improving their personal connections and reputations, we're supposed to laud them because "it's for charity". Well, here's a fucking idea. How about Tim Cook has coffee with a regular guy out in Montana who's never seen $500 in one place?

nraynaud 13y ago
I was thinking that the rich guy buying that should give it to a young entrepreneur whose endeavor is very dependent on supply chain management (or creation in that case), since it's Tim Cook's strong point. Real, useful, nerdy talk around a coffe.
- film42 13y ago
  Fine print says 2 people are allowed to go. Maybe he will. If he does, he's not allowed to auction it, though.
  - nraynaud 13y ago
    So there are people reading the fine print! :)
- jjoonathan 13y ago
  I keep hearing about Apple's supply chain management. Have they actually done anything clever or is it simply a side effect of the largest player's ability to extort anticompetitive favors from their supply chain? Honest question.
Udo 13y ago
I was going to write that comment, but you were quicker. Thanks, I absolutely agree. I would also say that the motivation for buying into that coffee meeting is puzzling. If someone can afford that ridiculous price tag they're pretty successful to begin with. Chances are, Tim Cook won't have anything meaningful to offer to that guy/girl besides the bragging rights of having met with Tim Cook. It's kind of embarrassing to be that person. Even if I had that kind of money and a desperate wish to meet Tim Cook (why?), I wouldn't want the press to find that out. Cook clearly doesn't need the money (edit: nor does he need to raise it this way for charity). So he either does it for ego, or he actually wants to help other people's businesses. Is this his idea of "giving back to the community"? If so, he should consider doing an office hour once a week for startup founders or something.
- martin_ 13y ago
  Cook doesn't need, or get the money. He did it for charity - I don't think we need to come to conclusions as to what else he can contribute to the community. As for his motives, who knows.. Perhaps it's just for the PR.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  IMO you're either right on that it's just about the bragging rights, or the person who bought the meeting once had a youthful crush on Apple. I've been known to do things that make very little sense as a "gift" to boyhood me.
- travisp 13y ago
  >If someone can afford that ridiculous price tag they're pretty successful to begin with. Chances are, Tim Cook won't have anything meaningful to offer to that guy/girl besides the bragging rights of having met with Tim Cook. This seems to be an odd thing to say. The wealthy have nothing else meaningful to gain or learn? Bill Gates had nothing meaningful to gain from reaching out to Steve Jobs? Is the only reason you could want to meet with Tim Cook because you want him to help your business? I assume that Tim Cook is probably an extraordinarily interesting man with many great insights. I think there are many reasons beyond "bragging rights" an already successful person could have to want to meet him.
  - olympus 13y ago
    >I assume that Tim Cook is probably an extraordinarily interesting man with many great insights. He probably won't say anything more than you could get from an MBA at University of Phoenix (which costs a smidgen less than $610,000). While I'm sure he's an intelligent man, I wouldn't assume that he's anything more than just a skilled businessman. If you're looking for managerial advice he's probably a good person to talk to, but I wouldn't call him interesting or say he has many great insights. So yeah, it's probably just bragging rights or having something to pitch to Apple.
    - pazimzadeh 13y ago
coryl 13y ago
"money they stole". Clarify?
- oinksoft 13y ago
  I'll try: I don't think it is fair to criticized parent for expressing his broad opinion on economics in this particular case. There is a wide body of political and economic thought which believes that capitalism in general is a system designed to create scarcity, social and economic stratification. This vein of thought is particularly prevalent in communist and anarchist circles (see, The Conquest of Bread, Kropotkin, 1892, for a progressive criticism of historic economic systems). Granted, most everybody who uses this website willfully engages in capitalism. However, quite a few do not, and are simply compelled to participate in it. To somebody in the second group who perceives what appears to be a notably frivolous use of money, it is particularly galling to for that same act to essentially further the aforementioned stratification. For that reason, the comment is relevant.
  - michaelochurch 13y ago
    I don't think capitalism is necessarily bad, and it's certainly better than Soviet-style (pseudo-)socialism. Meritocratic capitalism I'd favor strongly. The problem is this who-you-know corporate capitalism based on conformity rather than excellence. I agree that corporations create artificial scarcity, and that it's horrible. I don't know if that's a "capitalism" problem so much as an undesirable result of what happens when a small, socially closed set of people hog lots of resources.
    - oinksoft 13y ago
      Sure, but of course there are other options. Both liberal capitalism and national socialism/state communism (Soviet) are highly centralized forms of government, whereras anarcho-syndicalism is decentralized and highly capitalist, and anarcho-communism is decentralized, based upon overproduction and a radical reimagination of property rights. Barcelona and other parts of Valencia with a strong culture of trade were famously stable (the essential city services remained up and running, etc.) flying the black flag as an anarcho-syndicalist region in the 1930s for a few years before being infiltrated by the communists and dominated later in the Spanish Civil War.
baddox 13y ago
Surely you realize that the reason it's being called "for charity" is that the money is actually going to a (presumably legitimate) charity, not because Tim Cook is nice enough to spend a bit of time with the buyer.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
cynicalkane 13y ago
Charity and fundraising are the two socially acceptable ways to buy influence in the US. Honestly, I like that it's out in the open. Influence is subject to the same scarcities everything else is. You won't equalize society by hiding powerful peoples' connections, something every "equal" society has learned.
k2enemy 13y ago
I don't see this as the purchaser making a charitable contribution. Rather, it is Tim Cook making the charitable contribution by giving his time. Think of it this way -- if GM donated a Corvette to a charity to auction off, the winner of the auction is buying a Corvette, not giving to charity. It is GM that made the charitable contribution.
- jjoonathan 13y ago
  The problem with the Corvette analogy is that the Corvette has a well defined market price. GM's donation to charity is exactly equal to that price and the difference between the auction price and the market price is the contribution from the auction winner, who is only willing to pay 2x, 3x, 10x because the proceeds are going to charity. Tim Cook's time does not have a well defined marginal price since his compensation package is almost surely not tied to the amount of time he works.
chm 13y ago
The definition of "masturbation" should be expanded. And that of "evil". And "profiteering". This company must be making big bucks.
epo 13y ago
It's easier to be self-righteous than, you know, actually doing something yourself. What have you done for charity recently to merit this sanctimonious tone?
orangethirty 13y ago
When rich people give society back the money they stole... Could you elaborate on this?

nraynaud 13y ago

I was thinking that the rich guy buying that should give it to a young entrepreneur whose endeavor is very dependent on supply chain management (or creation in that case), since it's Tim Cook's strong point. Real, useful, nerdy talk around a coffe.

film42 13y ago
Fine print says 2 people are allowed to go. Maybe he will. If he does, he's not allowed to auction it, though.
- nraynaud 13y ago
  So there are people reading the fine print! :)
jjoonathan 13y ago
I keep hearing about Apple's supply chain management. Have they actually done anything clever or is it simply a side effect of the largest player's ability to extort anticompetitive favors from their supply chain? Honest question.

Udo 13y ago

I was going to write that comment, but you were quicker. Thanks, I absolutely agree. I would also say that the motivation for buying into that coffee meeting is puzzling. If someone can afford that ridiculous price tag they're pretty successful to begin with. Chances are, Tim Cook won't have anything meaningful to offer to that guy/girl besides the bragging rights of having met with Tim Cook. It's kind of embarrassing to be that person. Even if I had that kind of money and a desperate wish to meet Tim Cook (why?), I wouldn't want the press to find that out. Cook clearly doesn't need the money (edit: nor does he need to raise it this way for charity). So he either does it for ego, or he actually wants to help other people's businesses. Is this his idea of "giving back to the community"? If so, he should consider doing an office hour once a week for startup founders or something.

martin_ 13y ago
Cook doesn't need, or get the money. He did it for charity - I don't think we need to come to conclusions as to what else he can contribute to the community. As for his motives, who knows.. Perhaps it's just for the PR.
sliverstorm 13y ago
IMO you're either right on that it's just about the bragging rights, or the person who bought the meeting once had a youthful crush on Apple. I've been known to do things that make very little sense as a "gift" to boyhood me.
travisp 13y ago
>If someone can afford that ridiculous price tag they're pretty successful to begin with. Chances are, Tim Cook won't have anything meaningful to offer to that guy/girl besides the bragging rights of having met with Tim Cook. This seems to be an odd thing to say. The wealthy have nothing else meaningful to gain or learn? Bill Gates had nothing meaningful to gain from reaching out to Steve Jobs? Is the only reason you could want to meet with Tim Cook because you want him to help your business? I assume that Tim Cook is probably an extraordinarily interesting man with many great insights. I think there are many reasons beyond "bragging rights" an already successful person could have to want to meet him.
- olympus 13y ago
  >I assume that Tim Cook is probably an extraordinarily interesting man with many great insights. He probably won't say anything more than you could get from an MBA at University of Phoenix (which costs a smidgen less than $610,000). While I'm sure he's an intelligent man, I wouldn't assume that he's anything more than just a skilled businessman. If you're looking for managerial advice he's probably a good person to talk to, but I wouldn't call him interesting or say he has many great insights. So yeah, it's probably just bragging rights or having something to pitch to Apple.
  - pazimzadeh 13y ago

coryl 13y ago

"money they stole". Clarify?

oinksoft 13y ago
I'll try: I don't think it is fair to criticized parent for expressing his broad opinion on economics in this particular case. There is a wide body of political and economic thought which believes that capitalism in general is a system designed to create scarcity, social and economic stratification. This vein of thought is particularly prevalent in communist and anarchist circles (see, The Conquest of Bread, Kropotkin, 1892, for a progressive criticism of historic economic systems). Granted, most everybody who uses this website willfully engages in capitalism. However, quite a few do not, and are simply compelled to participate in it. To somebody in the second group who perceives what appears to be a notably frivolous use of money, it is particularly galling to for that same act to essentially further the aforementioned stratification. For that reason, the comment is relevant.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  I don't think capitalism is necessarily bad, and it's certainly better than Soviet-style (pseudo-)socialism. Meritocratic capitalism I'd favor strongly. The problem is this who-you-know corporate capitalism based on conformity rather than excellence. I agree that corporations create artificial scarcity, and that it's horrible. I don't know if that's a "capitalism" problem so much as an undesirable result of what happens when a small, socially closed set of people hog lots of resources.
  - oinksoft 13y ago
    Sure, but of course there are other options. Both liberal capitalism and national socialism/state communism (Soviet) are highly centralized forms of government, whereras anarcho-syndicalism is decentralized and highly capitalist, and anarcho-communism is decentralized, based upon overproduction and a radical reimagination of property rights. Barcelona and other parts of Valencia with a strong culture of trade were famously stable (the essential city services remained up and running, etc.) flying the black flag as an anarcho-syndicalist region in the 1930s for a few years before being infiltrated by the communists and dominated later in the Spanish Civil War.

baddox 13y ago

Surely you realize that the reason it's being called "for charity" is that the money is actually going to a (presumably legitimate) charity, not because Tim Cook is nice enough to spend a bit of time with the buyer.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

cynicalkane 13y ago

Charity and fundraising are the two socially acceptable ways to buy influence in the US. Honestly, I like that it's out in the open. Influence is subject to the same scarcities everything else is. You won't equalize society by hiding powerful peoples' connections, something every "equal" society has learned.

k2enemy 13y ago

I don't see this as the purchaser making a charitable contribution. Rather, it is Tim Cook making the charitable contribution by giving his time. Think of it this way -- if GM donated a Corvette to a charity to auction off, the winner of the auction is buying a Corvette, not giving to charity. It is GM that made the charitable contribution.

jjoonathan 13y ago
The problem with the Corvette analogy is that the Corvette has a well defined market price. GM's donation to charity is exactly equal to that price and the difference between the auction price and the market price is the contribution from the auction winner, who is only willing to pay 2x, 3x, 10x because the proceeds are going to charity. Tim Cook's time does not have a well defined marginal price since his compensation package is almost surely not tied to the amount of time he works.

chm 13y ago

The definition of "masturbation" should be expanded. And that of "evil". And "profiteering". This company must be making big bucks.

epo 13y ago

It's easier to be self-righteous than, you know, actually doing something yourself. What have you done for charity recently to merit this sanctimonious tone?

orangethirty 13y ago

When rich people give society back the money they stole... Could you elaborate on this?