Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses The Almighty Buck Apple

Al Gore Sells $29.5 Million In Apple Stock (appleinsider.com) 198

An anonymous reader quotes a report from AppleInsider: A U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Friday reveals Apple board member Al Gore this week sold 215,437 shares of Apple stock (APPL) worth about $29.5 million. Gore's stock sale, which was accomplished in multiple trades ranging from $136.4 to $137.12 on Wednesday, nearly matches a $29.6 million purchase of Apple shares made in 2013. When Gore bought the stock batch more than four years ago, he exercised Apple's director stock option to acquire 59,000 shares at a price of about $7.48 per share, costing him approximately $441,000. This was pre-split AAPL, so shares were valued at $502.68 each. Following today's sale, Gore owns 230,137 shares of Apple stock worth $31.5 million at the end of trading on Friday.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Al Gore Sells $29.5 Million In Apple Stock

Comments Filter:
  • by PeeAitchPee ( 712652 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @09:04AM (#53928473)
    . . . of carbon credits!
  • by Cytotoxic ( 245301 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @09:22AM (#53928527)

    That's good work if you can get it. A couple of hours per quarter, and the company usually flies you in and puts you up in swanky digs and takes you out for expensive dinners.

    And for the effort he managed to pull in some $60+ million in bonus incentives. Nice.

    Although, given his history as a politician who complained of many things of "the rich", including CEOs making exorbitant salaries and bonuses..... Doesn't that make this..... I dunno, ironic seems inadequate.

    Still, if you are looking for someone to sit on your board, I'll be happy to do it at half that rate!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      given his history as a politician who complained of many things of "the rich", including CEOs making exorbitant salaries and bonuses

      They're called Limousine Liberals for a reason.

    • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @11:20AM (#53928887) Journal

      Still, if you are looking for someone to sit on your board, I'll be happy to do it at half that rate!

      And I will do it for half your rate.

      And I have 34 slashdot achievements, 5 more than the competitor's who is quoting double my price.

    • That's good work if you can get it. A couple of hours per quarter, and the company usually flies you in and puts you up in swanky digs and takes you out for expensive dinners.

      And for the effort he managed to pull in some $60+ million in bonus incentives. Nice.

      Although, given his history as a politician who complained of many things of "the rich", including CEOs making exorbitant salaries and bonuses..... Doesn't that make this..... I dunno, ironic seems inadequate.

      Still, if you are looking for someone to sit on your board, I'll be happy to do it at half that rate!

      Exactly. Which of us reading these words would pass on the opportunity?

      • by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @12:21PM (#53929095)

        I'd have to pass on the opportunity. There's no way I could sit on the board and quietly agree with the rest of them that Tim Cook is doing a great job. There are a number of problems that need addressing and I couldn't keep quiet about them, no matter how good the money was.

        • Didn't GM pay Ross Perot a couple of billion dollars to go away when he was on the board after they bought his company? Apparently there is "speaking your mind" and then there is "being $2 billion worth of annoying".

          Also, good work if you can get it.

        • by Imrik ( 148191 )

          You don't have to quietly agree with them, just make sure there's a clause that pays out when they get rid of you.

    • by Gavagai80 ( 1275204 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @03:29PM (#53929721) Homepage

      Who could be better qualified to complain about the rich than one of them? If a poor person complains about the rich, they're just jealous.

  • Unjust (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 25, 2017 @09:24AM (#53928537)

    Director stock options are another unjust method of the one percent to take from everyone else while adding no value.

    • by lucm ( 889690 )

      It only takes $500,000/year per household to be a one-percenter; this means that a couple of Silicon Valley engineers or Boston lawyers are in that bucket, and those are not people who typically have a seat on Fortune 500 boards or spend their weekends snorting coke lines on the bare ass of teenage prostitutes while shopping for Faberge eggs on eBay.

      Maybe it's time for a more granular classification of the rich.

      • Yes, if you are looking at the 1% by income. However, the biggest issue isn't income inequality, it's wealth inequality. To be in the top 1% in wealth you need around $8 million in assets. Very few Silicon Valley engineers or Boston lawyers have that kind of kitty.

        The issue with wealth inequality is that money makes even more money and so the bulk of money made tends to flow to the people who already have the money and so they end up with more and more of it while there are fewer and fewer dollars availa

        • by lucm ( 889690 )

          The problem is not capitalism. The problem if the Federal Reserve giving money for free to big banks so those banks have no incentives to pay interests to people who want to have savings. The direct consequence is that investment banks are rewarded for taking risks, and institutional investors such as pension funds make riskier and riskier bets to merely beat the inflation and meet their annual benchmarks; they also pressure CEOs to focus on short-term profit, driving away the incentive for innovation and p

  • by rmdingler ( 1955220 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @09:45AM (#53928597) Journal
    Since this is in no way a rare instance of a powerful man cashing in public clout for some private wealth, ask yourself what the corporations get in return.

    A few hundred million in under priced stock options and bonus money for what? You may or may not like Apple, but they're not a stupid company. The value of a few meetings, a couple of favorable trade exceptions, and some lucrative government contract work probably more than covers this expense.

    The really civilized thing is, we do almost all of our bribery above board these days.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tomhath ( 637240 )

      The really civilized thing is, we do almost all of our bribery above board these days.

      Sometimes the money isn't a good investment. The Clinton Foundation went from collecting millions in donations from foreign nationals to layoffs in just a few weeks last fall.

      • by guruevi ( 827432 )

        Those foundations are just legal money laundering establishments. There never was any money in the foundation nor did it spend it on charity. The layoffs happen in response to a political need to save face but I you can be assured by the time Chelsey runs for office it will be twice the size to handle the "donations".

      • Some might say that's an unpresidented result.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 25, 2017 @10:35AM (#53928753)

      What Apple gets is simple. Stability, sanity and some level of honesty in the face of huge temptation and fear.

      You only have to look at Nokia to see what can happen if the wrong people get onto the board of a company. Somehow or other, the Nokia board managed to convince its self that a company which had managed to survive multiple revolutions in mobile communications was best led by a man who had failed repeatedly to build mobile success at Microsoft. The results are well known [blogs.com] (image from this article [blogs.com]).

      Why the did this I have no idea. Panic? Bribes? Stupidity? There has been no clear criminal investigation when there should have been but it seems they were just taken in by fear and a smooth talking failure in Elop. Still, the point is that now Apple may be in a similar situation. They have various long term technologies which won't pay off immediately. Nokia was doing Meego, it's own independent touch screen OS; Apple is doing it's own smart phone chips. They will now be under pressure from Chinese rivals and will go both down as well as up. If you keep working on these technologies you will survive and profit but you are very likely to suffer some relative decline even so. If your board panics and changes everything to try to force growth in a market where there is no more space, you may lose everything that you already have.

      No idea if Gore is the right guy, however I know how much could be lost if he's the wrong one. Apple's profits, around $40Billion yearly, are more than ten times Nokia's. Imagine those disappeared in two years because Apple became involved in someone like Microsoft and brought in someone like Elop.

      • This is a nice textbook version of what a board should do, but this is not nearly all of what boards do. It's also a very simplified version of what went wrong at Nokia, which started well before Elop (he historically terrible anyway).

        Yes, you need the board to give advice and help steer a company, but there are a LOT of other ways you can get that advice. You have a limited number of board seats to fill, so each seat necessarily does more than just give advice. The strategy of how to approach these variou

  • So when he acquired them they were worth ~ $500 ... and sold for ~$136. Must have read that wrong, yeah?

  • And? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Artem Tashkinov ( 764309 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @09:51AM (#53928637)

    What's in there for us, mere mortals? The guy got lucky and earned 6800% on his investment, great. Now where are the stories of people losing money by investing in a bad stock?

    Also, where would most people get $400K to invest in stock options when they have no spare money at all or even owe lots of money until they hit their late 50s?

    Or is it a story about a super successful company which is known to have a cult status, which allows it to sell the same product year after year with minimal changes, yet earn billions? I don't understand.

    • by damacus ( 827187 )

      Technically, you don't *need* $400K to exercise the stock options. You can do an immediate exercise -> sell and just take the profits of the difference between the strike price and current price of the instrument. However, doing that means instant capital gains tax hit, and also if you think the stock will continue to do alright and/or you want to collect dividends, you've lost the opportunity to hold the stock - which *would* require the $400K outlay.

      • Technically, you don't *need* $400K to exercise the stock options.

        What you usually do is you exercise your options, but you sell the exact amount that you need so that the sale covers the exercise cost and capital gains tax. You won't have to pay capital gains tax for the shares that you exercised but didn't sell.

        • by damacus ( 827187 )

          Thanks for this response. I'm familiar with exchange-traded options but not employer-granted options. And, as I never exercise options, I hadn't fully considered strategies involving exercising them. Appreciate it.

    • Someone who makes $26k a year starting out (with 3% cost of living raises) can retire with well over $1,000,000 if they do it properly.

      Source: http://wisdomsreward.com/2014/... [wisdomsreward.com]

      tl;dr: Invest a little of each paycheck in a low expense ration total stock market index fund. Compounding interest over decades with get you back much more than you would expect.

  • News for Nerds ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Crashmarik ( 635988 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @10:31AM (#53928747)

    This isn't even front page material for Yahoo Finance.

  • I read through some of the comments on this story, and I couldn't help but notice there were quite a few that related Gore's politics and finance. None gave him any credit at all for financial acumen.

    Yet not only did Gore make a lot of money by accepting (at the time cheap) stock for sitting on Apple's board, he made 'way more when he and another guy started up Current TV. Gore built it up and wound up selling it for major bucks.

    So basically, Gore showed real financial chops. But because he's an unapolog

    • by ooloorie ( 4394035 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @11:08AM (#53928851)

      I read through some of the comments on this story, and I couldn't help but notice there were quite a few that related Gore's politics and finance. None gave him any credit at all for financial acumen.

      Financial acumen? Gore got rich the same way Clinton did: by translating his political power, political advocacy, and connections into money.

      If you get rich legally before you enter politics, that shows that you can succeed by producing stuff people want. If you get rich after you leave high government office, it strongly suggests that you are a corrupt fraud. Gore clearly did the latter.

      • You're assuming that said person wasn't born into the connections like Trump was. Or Gore for that matter, his father was in politics too.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by hyades1 ( 1149581 )

        Wrong. Gore made all the right moves, especially with Current, and conservatives hate him for walking the walk. Meanwhile Trump, their anointed god, made a fortune by ripping off hard-working small businessmen in a series of planned bankruptcies made possible through laws enacted by crooked politicians bought and paid for by people like Trump.

        • by Imrik ( 148191 )

          Gore just cut out the middleman and passed the laws himself.

        • Wrong. Gore made all the right moves, especially with Current, and conservatives hate him for walking the walk.

          Current TV was a commercial failure. Gore bet on his government connections, his name recognition, and a big influx of money from foreign dictators.

          made possible through laws enacted by crooked politicians

          Yes, indeed. Crooked politicians like Gore for example.

          • Wrong again. Current made a lot of money, and Gore sold it at a huge profit.

            Conservatives really do hate people who succeed without cheating! I guess it makes them feel like they can't keep up when the playing field is level.

            • Wrong again. Current made a lot of money, and Gore sold it at a huge profit.

              Current TV was a financial failure, and Gore made his money by selling it to a Qatari prince. His Apple stock, incidentally, came from him being put on their boards of directors, also because of his name recognition.

              Conservatives really do hate people who succeed without cheating! I guess it makes them feel like they can't keep up when the playing field is level.

              Al Gore was born with a silver spoon in his mouth; he made his fame and

      • Or inherited a hell of a good chunk.

        I don't have any real issues with someone getting rich after they leave govt office, as you stated. As someone else mentioned once, it just means they're smart, right?

        • I don't have any real issues with someone getting rich after they leave govt office, as you stated. As someone else mentioned once, it just means they're smart, right?

          Al Capone was smart. Joseph Stalin was smart. Hitler and Goebbels were smart. Getting money and power through being smart is not intrinsically a good thing.

          Getting money and power through voluntary exchanges is a good thing; often the people who do that happen to be smart, but it is neither necessary nor sufficient.

          • Yes, but people still use the "he must be clever/good because he's rich" argument about Trump. As you say, it proves nothing. Someone who is rich has money, there is nothing more to it than that.
            • Yes, but people still use the "he must be clever/good because he's rich" argument about Trump. As you say, it proves nothing.

              I said no such thing. What I said was: "Getting money and power through voluntary exchanges is a good thing"

              That is, Trump got rich in the market (good), while Gore and Clinton got rich through being politicians (bad).

    • I read through some of the comments on this story, and I couldn't help but notice there were quite a few that related Gore's politics and finance. None gave him any credit at all for financial acumen.

      Yet not only did Gore make a lot of money by accepting (at the time cheap) stock for sitting on Apple's board, he made 'way more when he and another guy started up Current TV. Gore built it up and wound up selling it for major bucks.

      So basically, Gore showed real financial chops. But because he's an unapologetic hypocrite, there's all kinds of sniping about private jets and save the whales by the same people who venerate Donald Trump. Yet Trump's main claim to fame is the number of times he's declared bankruptcy in ways allowing him to screw contractors over without losing any of his own money.

      Fixed that for you.

    • I should add that FWIW, my stance on environmentalism is such that I wish (for example) that police would fingerprint or DNA litter, then fine the owners. Or that if I saw someone throwing a cigarette butt out of their window, it was legal for me to get out of my car, retrieve their cigarette butt, and put it out in their eyeballs.

      That doesn't make me see Al Gore as any less of a douche than he is.

      If everyone would stop speculating what they think OTHER people with opposing views would think as a means to

  • by gnasher719 ( 869701 ) on Saturday February 25, 2017 @11:41AM (#53928977)
    So al Gore sold lots of Apple shares. Someone wanted to appear smart and wrote "sold 215,437 shares of Apple stock (APPL)"

    Apparently that idiot isn't aware that APPL is a long defunct oil company that hasn't traded for many years. Apple's stock symbol is AAPL.
  • $29.5 million? Think how many Manbearpig hunting expeditions that could fund!
  • I hear Google are investing a lot in AI these days.

"If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong." -- Norm Schryer

Working...