Two Suggestions for Apple’s Board of Directors

As an Apple (AAPL) shareholder, the recent handling of disclosures regarding the health of CEO Steve Jobs has me upset like most other investors. For some reason, Apple’s board of directors believes that a CEO facing a potentially fatal cancer is not “material” piece of news.

They didn’t tell us right away when Jobs was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer several years ago, despite a five year survival rate of less than 50%, and they have refused to update us on his health. Now we have to rely on tech-related blog sources to update us and when finally forced to give more details, the Apple board said he was fine, only to announce his six month leave of absence days later.

As if this is not difficult enough for shareholders, the company is currently sitting on $28 billion of cash in the bank. Apple’s cash hoard would rank it the 55th most valuable company in the S&P 500 even if it had no operations whatsoever. Why on earth is Apple keeping this much cash on its books?

They will tell you they want to keep money available to make strategic acquisitions and to weather economic downturns. Has Apple ever made a large acquisition? Did they not just announce better than expected earnings for the fourth quarter despite this severe recession? There is simply no reason for them to have $28 billion just sitting there.

I have two suggestions for Apple’s board of directors. Not only will both moves boost Apple’s share price, but more importantly it would simply show some desire on their part to be fair to their shareholders, the same people who pay their salaries.

1) Announce a Management Succession Plan

How hard is this, really? Apple has plenty of competent managers. All the board has to do is announce what the management hierarchy would look like if Jobs left the company for personal reasons. With that knowledge in hand, he can stay as long as he wants as far as I’m concerned! The board knows this is a crucial issue (the stock plummets each time the health issue appears troubling), but simply ignores it for some reason.

Personally, I do not believe that a Jobs-less Apple would be in trouble. The idea that he is the entire brains behind the company and its products, and not the other 35,000 employees is pretty silly. Jobs is certainly a very good CEO, but the idea that Apple lacks the talent to innovate without him seems far fetched to me.

2) Announce a Stock Buyback Plan and Repurchase 20% of the Company

At current prices they could retire 20% of the company’s outstanding shares and still have $12 billion of cash in the bank (and that number would grow every quarter from there). Can anyone really make the argument that Apple needs more than $10 billion of cash? I guess if you think they are going to buy Dell for cash or something than you could, but large tech acquisitions rarely are successful and more importantly, Apple has no history of even attempting them. A large buyback would be significantly accretive to earnings per share and could get the stock rolling again after the latest Jobs-related hiccups.

Neither of these moves would hamper the future outlook for Apple whatsoever. They would simply show that the board of directors is actually doing their job; working for the shareholders of the company.

Full Disclosure: Peridot Capital was long shares of AAPL at the time of writing, but positions may change at any time

Enjoy this post? Subscribe and never miss another one: RSS | Email | Twitter

9 Thoughts on “Two Suggestions for Apple’s Board of Directors

  1. Pingback: Peridot Capital Management: Apple deveria anunciar plano de sucessão e oferecer recompra de ações

  2. Completely agree with you. I think all the uproar about whether or not the board should be more transparent with Steve Jobs’ health isn’t the issue. It could all be solved simply by being more open about the succession plan which should appease rational investors and respect Jobs’ right to privacy.

  3. For what it’s worth, I would say that Apple has been generally clear in its preference to name a successor from within current executive ranks. Jobs mentioned it at the March 2008 shareholders meeting. And, anyone who’s done a little digging would find that Apple has a very deep bench of talented executives.

  4. Although I agree with you, I don’t think Apple will do either. That’s because Apple is being Apple. Its culture is about a closed eco-system and so does its pr and strategy and finance and everything.

    Investor will finally realize the value of Apple though. Accumulating $3+ billion cash every quarter constantly is a telling story, with or without Jobs.

  5. Why is the succession plan so important. They need only announce that they have one. No one seems out of sorts because Berkshire Hathaway has never announced their succession plan. Warren Buffett is certainly as important to his company and shareholders as Jobs is to Apple.

  6. Chad Brand on January 26, 2009 at 10:42 AM said:

    Warren Buffett is not ill. If he was, I would think they would announce who is successor was going to be.

  7. Rolf Teuchert on January 26, 2009 at 3:07 PM said:

    Just a hint: The people who pay the salaries are the customers and not the Street. I will be glad with my stock as long as people like You don’t have any influence with Apple.

  8. Chad Brand on January 27, 2009 at 8:55 AM said:

    Actually, shareholder money pays the board of directors. The revenue from customers belongs to the company and the stockholders own the company.

  9. Christoph on March 9, 2012 at 12:34 PM said:

    Hi Rolf,
    are you from Hamburg/Germany and went to school with me?

Post Navigation