Tim Cook and Co can't really manage expectations

[Flynnstone]

To the OP ... no!

I think Apple ( Tim & Co) is doing great.
I think Apple doesn't pay too much attention to Wall St. I think too many companies waste too much attention on what Wall st. says.

Apple concentrates on building great products. And I think that works.

 

[colbertnation]

Jeez... look at the fanboys here!

Folks, I love Apple as much as you all do. I own pretty much all of Apple's line up.

But to think that Apple, as a corporation, isn't somehow responsible for managing expectations in Wall Street as well as the public's expectations is quite wrongful thinking.

The reason is that Apple enjoys attention that other electronic corporations could only dream of, and other (financial) corporations enjoy. Because of this scrutiny, Apple definitely has a responsibility to make sure that this rumor mill, as well as the analysts (who I agree are not that intelligent), stays in check.

I remember distinctly that SJ would let rumors run rampant before announcements, but would always make sure to tame them down to manageable levels before the announcement via controlled WSJ leaks. Recently, with Tim Cook, I only remember two controlled WSJ leaks: no 4G on next iPhone, and announcement on Oct 4th.

That's quite a bad record given that iPhone 5 rumors were running wild before the announcement.

Now, some of you say that we should blame ourselves for believing these rumors that Apple never confirmed or denied. And you are right to a certain extent. But the thing is, many of these cases and rumors were unusually making front pages on mainstream media sites (including Yahoo's homepage), where average consumers go to. This raised the hopes and expectations of average consumers also.

I'm not sure when the plan for releasing the 5 was scrapped in lieu of the 4S, but to say that Apple had absolutely no obligation to lower these hopes and expectations of the 5 before the announcement, is quite ludicrous.

As Tim Cook said, these iPhone 5 rumors hurt their iPhone 4 sales (despite beating Apple's own expectations). Don't you think a nice early controlled leak of "spec bumped iPhone in Oct" would have kept that in check? It would also have lowered expectations of these not so intelligent analysts.

Folks, the point is, Apple, as a public corporation, has an obligation to keep the public's and its investor's expectations in check. There is no reason to blame ourselves for believing rumors... these rumors were making front pages, meaning even a wider audience and even higher hopes and expectations. You cannot deny that Apple faltered here a bit.

I will say this though, with all due to respect to Tim Cook... he and the team did a fantastic presentation given the circumstances.

----------

You mean instead of the FOUR MILLION iPhones they sold already, they could have sold what? Five? Six?

What this shows is that the geeks and technotalking heads make up an insignificant percentage of the buying public. The masses that spend the money spoke loud and clear with their WALLETS. They love the iPhone 4S.

Don't believe everything you read from the press. Most of them are morons.

What are you talking about? I said iPhone 4 Q4 sales weren't as high as they could have been due to iPhone rumors (as said by Tim Cook himself). Not iPhone 4S sales. iPhone 4S sales were obviously through the roof, no one is denying that.

 

[ucfgrad93]

There is no reason to blame ourselves for believing rumors...

Ok, props to you for actually coming back and responding.

That said, this statement is beyond ridiculous. Just because you see something on the internet or an analyst says something doesn't mean it is the gospel truth. As Ronald Reagan once said, "Trust, but verify."

 

[colbertnation]

Ok, props to you for actually coming back and responding.

... what is that even supposed to mean?

That said, this statement is beyond ridiculous. Just because you see something on the internet or an analyst says something doesn't mean it is the gospel truth. As Ronald Reagan once said, "Trust, but verify."

hahahahahaha, good ol' Reagan. You do know that the same man also said "Facts are stupid things," right?

And no one claimed it was gospel truth. You are seriously exaggerating to the extent to how much I, or anyone for that matter, believed in these rumors. We take them for what they are: rumors, myths, sometimes lies, etc. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't believe any rumor. Some rumors have a very credible feel to them. A "rumor" originating from WSJ about no new iPhone until Oc... to.... ber was met with heavy skepticism. But guess what, she was right. The same lady then at the end of september says the event will be at hometown, and almost everyone believes her. Why? Because she has proven her credibility, and on top of that, it makes sense. As you said that Reagan said, "trust, but verify." We trusted her after she was right once, then we verified that all the usual Apple event venues are booked. So it was logical to believe the rumor that it will be on campus.

Now, this is what happened with the other iPhone 5 rumors. Several heavyweights weighed in that the new iPhone would be redesigned (some were conservative and stated lighter/thinner, others were drastic and stated teardrop, etc). Then we get cases, which apparently were also a heavyweight due to the iPad 2 cases being spot on. Then we get the Photostream icon, which many believed to be very representative of what we imagined iPhone 5 would look like.

All the while, Tim and Co did nothing to combat these string of iPhone 5 rumors and expectations. Is it because they wanted to release an iPhone 5, so they were okay with expectations and speculation of an iPhone 5? Not sure. We'll never know, but the point is, Tim and Co didn't manage expectations well enough.

Of course, I'd cut them some slack, judging by the fact that they had some sever circumstances around the announcement period, what with SJ and all. But, I don't think anyone can deny here that Apple hasn't been able to manage its expectations as well as it used to.

Hopefully Tim Cook gets better at it, now that the extenuating circumstances are fading into memory.

----------

You seem to think that Tim Cook is new to the job and not yet experienced at it. You don't get to be a senior manager in a company such as Apple, let alone the CEO, without a great deal of experience and a track record to prove it.

What? No. I never said Tim Cook is bad at his job. He's a genius when it comes to operations. He helped turn Apple around by managing Apple's inventory so well, and continuing to do so 'till today. But here's the thing... he's not COO anymore. His job just became less specialized, and as a result, he has to now take care of everything: from internal Apple stuff, to the way Apple presents to the world. Obviously, Tim Cook has had "training" before as acting CEO, but I don't think he has had sufficient training in how to manipulate the media and the public to control their expectations of Apple.

 

[MacHamster68]

who could meet the expectations of Apple customers/fans , Steve Jobs was great , and idolized , but after all he was only a human, even if some Apple fans still cant believe that.
The majority of Apple customers or more the fans now expect in Tim Cook a clone of Steve Jobs which he clearly is not , but he might have other talents , after all it was Steve Jobs who had chosen him to lead Apple into the future . O.K. Steve was ill when he made that decision , but he was not mentally ill , So i guess Steve had good reasons to chose Tim Cook and i am not sure if we should Judge Tim so quickly , maybe we should wait another year so Tim can show that Steve made the right decision .

If not then there is still enough time to ask maybe Michael Dell or Steve Ballmer if they would like to run Apple , only suggest it because some did not want Steve Wozniak back instead , but maybe we could ask Bill Gates too, he's a bit jobless at the moment and a clear fan of Mac's and knows a bit about computers and software in general too
Or maybe someone who has not much to do with the computing industry , but knows a bit about business and marketing
Sir Richard Branson ....then his next attempt to circumvent the earth in a balloon would be in a Apple shaped one i guess, only problem he would change the name of Apple into Virgin

 

[*LTD*]

The majority of Apple customers or more the fans now expect in Tim Cook a clone of Steve Jobs

We already have one. His name is Scott Forstall.

 

[MacHamster68]

We already have one. His name is Scott Forstall.

Scott's a great in what he does , but not sure about his skills as a businessman , so not sure if he would be better then Tim .

Sir Richard Branson on the other hand was admiring Steve Jobs , and is quiet quiet a good businessman too and can lead a company definitely and he could transform Apple into a real competitor for the rest of the pc makers and he's a iPad fan
ok he's got a habit of renaming companies into Virgin, but look at his business record looks impressive , but i think the logo looks not to bad

after all that would show a new era has begun

 

[Bernard SG]

To the OP ... no!

I think Apple ( Tim & Co) is doing great.
I think Apple doesn't pay too much attention to Wall St. I think too many companies waste too much attention on what Wall st. says.

Apple concentrates on building great products. And I think that works.

Exactly!!!
Nothing to add to that, that's what Apple is all about.