蘋(píng)果公司最新召開(kāi)的股東大會(huì)傳遞不少負(fù)面信息，股東對(duì)于蘋(píng)果在現(xiàn)金儲(chǔ)備使用問(wèn)題上毫無(wú)作為失去耐心，并對(duì)蘋(píng)果對(duì)中國(guó)工人的待遇不滿(mǎn)。另外與中國(guó)公司的商標(biāo)權(quán)官司糾紛已鬧到美國(guó)本土。
Those criticisms largely remained on the periphery Thursday. About a dozen workers‘rights protesters carrying signs that included calling for “an ethical iPhone”stayed on the outskirts of the meeting. But Apple received no questions from investors on the labor topic，which has been the subject of recent media reports.
十幾位主張工人權(quán)利的抗議者舉著各種標(biāo)語(yǔ)在會(huì)場(chǎng)外抗議，其中一條標(biāo)語(yǔ)呼吁蘋(píng)果制造符合道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的iPhone。但投資者沒(méi)有就勞工問(wèn)題向蘋(píng)果公司提出質(zhì)疑。勞工權(quán)利問(wèn)題一直是近來(lái)媒體報(bào)道的主題。(《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》)
此次股東大會(huì)的召開(kāi)正值蘋(píng)果日益上升的地位令其不斷遭到投資者批評(píng)之際，批評(píng)涉及的問(wèn)題包括中國(guó)工人的權(quán)利以及公司透明度等。
Other shareholder measures that Apple directors opposed—including giving shareholders a say on director pay and aproposal for directors to create a report on their potential conflicts of interest—received scant support，according toresults from ballots submitted before the meeting.
股東大會(huì)召開(kāi)前提交的無(wú)記名投票的結(jié)果顯示，蘋(píng)果董事反對(duì)的其它股東提案獲得的支持有限。這些提案包括，股東對(duì)董事薪酬有發(fā)言權(quán)，以及董事應(yīng)提交報(bào)告說(shuō)明潛在利益沖突。(《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》)
此次股東大會(huì)也是對(duì)公司董事及首席執(zhí)行長(zhǎng)庫(kù)克的最新考驗(yàn)，多年的幕后工作之后，他一直在塑造自己的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)風(fēng)格。
Mr. Cook wasn’t specific about how Apple would spend its roughly $100 billion cash hoard，including whether the company would award a dividend or buy back shares.Instead，Mr. Cook said Apple has been thinking about cash “very deeply” and is actively discussing strategies for managing it with its board.“It’s a lot，”he added.“It’s more than we need to run the company.”
庫(kù)克沒(méi)有明說(shuō)蘋(píng)果打算如何花費(fèi)約1，000億美元的現(xiàn)金儲(chǔ)備，包括蘋(píng)果是否打算派發(fā)股息或回購(gòu)股票。相反，庫(kù)克說(shuō)蘋(píng)果一直在仔細(xì)考慮有關(guān)現(xiàn)金儲(chǔ)備的問(wèn)題，也在同董事會(huì)積極探討管理現(xiàn)金的策略。庫(kù)克說(shuō)，這是一大筆錢(qián)，超出我們運(yùn)營(yíng)公司所需的資金。(福克斯新聞網(wǎng))
拆股也是投資者此前提出的一種方案。庫(kù)克說(shuō)，正在研究這一問(wèn)題，但這是否符合股東的利益還未得出明確的結(jié)論。
Proview said in its filing that by using its subsidiary，and not explaining the true purpose for buying the iPad trademark，Apple acted“with oppression，fraud and/or malice.”
唯冠在訴訟中說(shuō)，蘋(píng)果通過(guò)這家子公司進(jìn)行操作，而不解釋其購(gòu)買(mǎi)iPad商標(biāo)的真正目的，其行為存在“壓制、欺詐和/或惡意”。(CNBC《消費(fèi)者新聞與商業(yè)頻道》)
蘋(píng)果股東大會(huì)召開(kāi)之際也迎來(lái)了中國(guó)唯冠電子股份有限公司的官司。唯冠與蘋(píng)果公司的商標(biāo)權(quán)官司打到了美國(guó)的一家法院，目的是禁止蘋(píng)果繼續(xù)使用該商標(biāo)。