Got a tip for us? Share it...

New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Releases 2012 Proxy Statement to Investors

Apple has posted its 2012 Proxy Statement (PDF) on its investor relations page. The proxy statement is released ahead of the annual stockholders meeting, and details voting procedures, background and compensation information on the company's directors, and information about executive perks and compensation, amongst other items.

This year's shareholders meeting will take place on Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. Pacific, in Building 4 of Apple's Infinite Loop headquarters. Shareholders will vote on a number of different items:
- To elect the Company’s Board of Directors (the “ Board ”). The Board intends to present for election the following eight nominees: William V. Campbell, Timothy D. Cook, Millard S. Drexler, Al Gore, Robert A. Iger, Andrea Jung, Arthur D. Levinson, and Ronald D. Sugar

- To ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2012

- To hold an advisory vote on executive compensation

- To consider four shareholder proposals titled "Conflict of Interest Report", "Shareholder Say on Director Pay", "Report on Political Contributions and Expenditures", and "Adopt a Majority Voting Standard for Director Elections"

- To transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting and any postponement(s) or adjournment(s) thereof.
Some interesting notes in the statement include the fact that CEO Tim Cook owns a total of 13,754 shares of Apple plus 1,362,500 RSU's which will vest into shares if Tim Cook stays with the company for the foreseeable future, worth $580.5 million at current prices. Other executive officers hold hundreds of thousands of RSU's which should keep them with the company for years to come. In the statement, Apple explained the board's philosophy behind the large RSU grants:
The compensation for the other named executive officers consists of three elements—long-term equity awards in the form of RSU awards, annual performance-based cash bonuses, and base salaries—that are designed to reward performance in a simple and straightforward manner. The compensation program is weighted toward long-term equity awards rather than cash compensation in order to maximize retention and ensure that a significant portion of the named executive officers’ compensation is tied to the Company’s long-term stock price performance. The named executive officers’ 2011 cash compensation levels were substantially below the levels generally provided by peer companies, despite the Company’s strong financial performance. In addition, the Company has no long-term cash compensation program, nor does it have a pension plan.

The Company’s executive compensation program is intended to promote and retain stability within the executive team. Each named executive officer has been an employee of the Company for at least 10 years. The Company expects each of its executive officers to contribute to the Company’s overall success as a member of the executive team rather than focus solely on specific objectives within the officers’ area of responsibility.

Because the Company’s executive officers operate as a team, the Compensation Committee’s decisions on executive compensation in 2011 were largely driven by considerations of internal pay equity as to the named executive officers, other than Mr. Jobs and Mr. Cook. As a result, the compensation awarded to Messrs. Oppenheimer, Forstall and Johnson in 2011 was largely the same. Mr. Cook’s compensation is set at a higher level than the compensation for the other members of the executive team to reflect his responsibilities for the overall leadership of the Company.
In addition, the statement notes that "there was no formula or peer group “benchmark” used in determining the award amount. Rather, the award was the product of the Board’s business judgment, which was informed by the experience of the Board members, the input received from Mr. Jobs, and the Board’s assessment of Mr. Cook’s performance in assuming responsibility for the Company’s day-to-day operations during Mr. Jobs’s prior leaves of absence." The statement discusses executive compensation for several more pages, including the cash bonus payout structure and other arrangements.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

33 months ago
I still can't believe he's gone.

Rating: 8 Votes
33 months ago

:: Waits for an "occupy" radical to jump in here to declare that "No one should have that kind of money!!!!!!!" :: :rolleyes:


In an exquisitely ironic way you have beat them to the punch.
Well done, comrade.
Rating: 4 Votes
33 months ago
:: Waits for an "occupy" radical to jump in here to declare that "No one should have that kind of money!!!!!!!" :: :rolleyes:
Rating: 4 Votes
33 months ago

Cook is going to be stuck with Apple for a while if he wants his payday.


STUCK!!!???

For half a billion dollars I wouldn't quit if I died. I'd have myself frozen and propped up in the Executive Board Room. :rolleyes: ;)

I'm not sure the word "stuck" applies to Tim Cook's situation. CEO of one of the most respected and valuable companies in the world doesn't sound like "stuck".

And the dough ain't bad, neither.:D
Rating: 4 Votes
33 months ago
What a refreshing difference between Apple's board and H.P.'s in how they think and operate.
Rating: 4 Votes
33 months ago

HALF A BILLION IN SHARES?!?!??!


Lucky...

I'd do it for HALF that!

:P


Steve Jobs did it for $1 a year!

Steve Jobs may have been ruthless and he was extremely wealthy, but no one can deny that he ran Apple because he was in love with the company and was driven to fuse art and technology.

Jobs had great vision and delivered revolutionary products to the world. We will see if Apple will continue to innovate and stay on top or if they will fall back into the Apple of the mid 1990's.

I will say this: If Apple is led by profit driven leadership then be prepared for garbage products. If Apple is to remain on top they need someone with vision and passion.
Rating: 3 Votes
33 months ago
I'll admit, I had to Google "Proxy Statement". Then I noticed the Wiki link. :p
Rating: 3 Votes
33 months ago
This reflects the idea that when you have a winning team, why change things?

Continuity is important for Apple because Steve had years to not only impart his wisdom to everyone else but through :apple:U he was able to ensure that his way of seeing the world would become a part of Apple. Think Mercedes or BMW or any other brand that has been able to stay on the cutting edge.

I think a lot of the problem with so many companies in the US today is the lack of continuity of leadership coupled with the lack of innovation.

I hope I'm around in 20 years to be able to look back and see how well Apple has done.
Rating: 2 Votes
33 months ago

I think that Mr Cook should not get the position ... I don't know what others think, but when I see people get too much power, they start to loose sight on the important things.


Please, enlighten us on who YOU think should trump the choice of Steve Jobs himself. And explain why this person taking Steve's old job shouldn't have the same position and responsibilites Steve wanted. Also, please cite the multinational supercompany you built that makes your opinion viable to anyone who wasn't fished out of an urban storm drain.
Rating: 2 Votes
33 months ago
Job, Jobs, Jobs. I seem to have heard that before and am glad this recent statement still considers the judgment and name of the now fallen soldier of Apple.

Rocketman
Rating: 2 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]