Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There is no law mandating 'fiduciary responsibility' to maximise profit.

In the US, and in Delaware (where many US corporations are incorporated) in particular, there is a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of the shareholders. There are many court cases about failure to maximize shareholder value. In eBay Domestic Holdings, Inc. v. Newmark, 16 A.3d 1 (Del. Ch. 2010), eBay, a minority shareholder, sued Craigslist founders for failing to pursue opportunities for profit and platform monetization. Craigslist argued that they were trying maintain a community orientation. The court found that a for-profit corporation cannot justify failing to pursue profits solely for altruistic reasons unless the corporate charter explicitly allows it. The court specifically emphasized that for-profit corporations are expected to act with the purpose of generating returns for their shareholders.
 
Folks need to stop saying “TDS”

People are reacting to real actions taking place before our eyes

There is no “derangement”

(The D in TDS)

Also, people using the TDS acronym know what they are doing.
It’s generally being used as a pejorative towards others
 
There is no law mandating 'fiduciary responsibility' to maximise profit.

Anyway, anybody who donates to the Trump inauguration goes down a notch in my respect. That million dollars could have fed and housed many in the US who need help. It is a shame we have been reduced to a country in which crass bribes are the norm. Time to reform laws regarding lobbying, campaign finance, conflict of interest, nepotism, and media and social media ownership, even if it requires amendments to the Constitution. Otherwise government policy will continue to be determined by the wealthy while the rest of us have no influence (see figure 1 at https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595 ). Just my two cents about Cook's 'donation' and the political power inequality that wealth inequality causes.

Well, regardless of whether it is a Law or not (I believe it is in some US States at least), it is a legal precedence that does exist and can result in lawsuits being filed if it is not upheld, I added three links below that add some detail to it at least. I do fully agree with the rest of your post.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LarryB08
I get that when you're the CEO of the world's most valuable company, you essentially have an obligation to shareholders to grovel the President -- especially when the President is so conceited and vindictive. But this one...? God. Don't even know what to make of this. I'll just leave it at that.
 
What shame that in order to get assistance from our government, you have to bribe them. However I am not surprised, this has been the case throughout history.
IMHO, the $1M is just to get afoot in the door. More and much larger donations will be needed to even get the ear of a member of the Cabinet let alone the man himself. Everything in this administration has a cost. Everything is to enhance the coffers of the POTUS and to hell with the law.
 
You don’t “buy influence” for an Inaugural Committee, you’d donate to their campaign, and Trump can no longer run for office so there won’t be one. The only thing Cook could offer at this point is helping with domestic victories, like manufacturing jobs and domestic investment.

Like I mentioned, they have spoken at least every couple of months now for years. He already has the ability to call DJT and he pick up the phone.
Without donations, presidents use leftover campaign funds to pay for the inauguration. So the donations do save the campaign money. And despite Trump not running anymore, those leftover campaign funds can still be used for other things, and there's lots of loopholes regarding how to use them.
 
Without donations, presidents use leftover campaign funds to pay for the inauguration. So the donations do save the campaign money. And despite Trump not running anymore, those leftover campaign funds can still be used for other things, and there's lots of loopholes regarding how to use them.
As a campaign finance attorney, I can tell you that is all incorrect and whomever told you that has been giving you very bad counsel.
 
Those are political positions. They in no way prove he "hates" gay or transgender people. He had gay people in his previous administration. Has already nominated one that I know of in this upcoming administration. Weird way to show he "hates" someone.
It's a hateful political position with no basis besides preventing gay or transgender people from having the same rights as heterosexual people. As a gay person, it's pretty clear he considers me as someone worth taking rights away from for simply existing.
 
I wonder how many Apple customers who are so outraged about Cook's personal donation to trump will now standup and purchase competitor tech products and phones going forward, sending Apple a strong message?

Or will they instead look the other way and choose to be complicit and continue to use and purchase Apple products?
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: rmadsen3 and I7guy
Next four years the motto will be trickle up economics. This is likely just the beginning. But apparently this is exactly what the voters wanted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carswell


Apple CEO Tim Cook plans to donate $1 million to Donald Trump's inauguration fund, reports Axios. The donation will be a personal donation directly from Cook rather than a donation from Apple.

Tim-Cook-MacBook-16x9.jpeg

Following Trump's win, Cook congratulated him on social media site X, and in December, Cook had dinner with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Cook aimed to maintain a relationship with Trump during Trump's first term as president, and it appears Cook plans to continue on with that plan going forward.

Sources that spoke to Axios said that Cook is donating to the inauguration "in the spirit of unity." Apple is not expected to make a donation.

Trump is taking office as Apple faces regulatory pressure both in the United States and in other countries. In March 2024, Apple was sued by the United States Department of Justice for allegedly violating antitrust law in multiple ways with its platforms. The Apple vs. DoJ legal battle will play out during Trump's term.

Amazon, Meta, Uber, OpenAI's Sam Altman, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Coinbase, Toyota, Ford, GM, AT&T, Black & Decker, and Charter Communications are also making donations to Trump's inauguration fund.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook Donating $1 Million to Trump's Inaugural Fund
I am appalled at the speed at which corruption at the highest level has been normalized in the United States. CEOs now have to pay a bribe to the President of the United States in order to secure safety for their company. That's just sad. I wish I could find ANYWHERE on this planet that's not just as pathetic. Ironically, I would use all the money I've made on AAPL to make the move. But alas. The planet is now just a huge spinning ball of utter losers.
 
Last edited:
Without donations, presidents use leftover campaign funds to pay for the inauguration. So the donations do save the campaign money. And despite Trump not running anymore, those leftover campaign funds can still be used for other things, and there's lots of loopholes regarding how to use them.

And, as we found out during Trump's first inauguration, a big chunk of the inauguration funds will be spent at Trump properties and with businesses owned by close associates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
As a campaign finance attorney, I can tell you that is all incorrect and whomever told you that has been giving you very bad counsel.
I didn't know that.

Either way, Tim is doing Trump a favor. And without getting too partisan, that's kinda how the game is played in DC. I do you a favor, you do me a favor. In both parties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UltimaKilo
I feel bad for Tim. As others have said, he had to bend the knee. That's not his fault. I feel confident that he did not vote for Trump. Yet, enough other people did vote for trump, or decided it was okay for Trump to be President again that they didn't vote at all, that he won. Tim has to be concerned about what's good for Apple. That's his job. So, he spent a million dollars of his own money to do what's good for Apple. Sad, but that's the way it is. We live in a democracy (for now). This democracy decided it wanted Trump as President again. Yes, terrifically stupid. But, that's what mob rule gets you sometimes.
 
Between this, the insane levels of stock buy backs which make the rich richer, and the Apple Creative Crushing advertisement, it has put a knife into whatever remaining illusions we had about Apple being the rebel and for "good"

Its just a corporation like any other
 
Last edited:
It’s Tim Cook’s personal money. Not money that comes from the company. He’s free to do whatever he wants with it
Trump has invited Cook to a few dinners in his first term and has received an invitation to the 2025 Presidential inaguration and inaugural ball
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.