Apple

http://google.com

1. To make as much money as possible.
2. To make as much money as possible.
3. They run ads.

Ads, press releases, keynotes (which are arguably incredibly long ads), actions like the recent iPhone $100 refund, etc.

As for the mission statement, try the Apple Investors FAQ page. Two minutes with Google.

And the Doc is right. Apple is a publicly traded company. In the US, it's their obligation to maximize revenues for shareholders.

because if it is, you're in sad shape if you don't have the wherewithall to track down this info yourself. This stuff is research basics. Hell, if my kid can't do better than this by 6th grade I'm gonna be really pissed.

Uh, no offense meant of course. :-\

Edit: I hope I don't seem unfriendly, it's just that these sorts of questions pop up regularly. The answers are very easy to find if you just extend yourself a little, and NOT by asking others to do your research for you.

dan k

It may be the one thing every child growing up in America should learn about--the heart and soul of corporate capitalism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Company

But, you know, simply making as much money as possible is not usually the "mission statement," unless you've reached the size and character where you have enough power and influence, for instance, to start wars in the Middle East in order to gain control of oil reserves and the routes, production, and ownership of oil pipelines. We all know what is implied by the term "mission statement." It's the means to profit, a supply to demand, and/or the creation of a demand for a materializing supply that is in one's possession (something Apple has gotten good at). Ford wanted every man in America to be able to own a car in an already proven strategy that would also, in the long term, maximize profits. As for Apple? Maybe we could make up a mission statement for them?

Really, the name says it all. Capitalism is simply the system in which the means of production are operated for profit. Most people and most companies (all over the world) operate this way.

The argument against Ford was that the the company was owned by stockholders who were due money as part of their deal for purchasing Ford stocks. All the court really did was reaffirm who was the "sink" of the excess F.M.C. profits. Ford himself was not the top of the heap in that particular view point (he was majority share holder, but there is the board of directors) so he couldn't make the kind of changes that he wanted. F.M.C. would have been in breach of contract to change the terms of the stock sales - which would have invalidated all the obligations of the stock holders (payment), ie. require Ford to return to them their money that paid for their shares. Doing so might have bankrupted Ford but it would have turned F.M.C. into a privately held company with which Ford could have done as he wished. That he didn't do so says something to me about Ford wanting to continue to make money.

Making money is the mission, as thats the whole point of the enterprise.

...as opposed to something understood. Of course, making money to provide larger revenues is the ultimate mission, but just like all mission statement examples listed in your link, a mission statement usually doesn't actually say that, but rather refers mostly--even if only for the sake of appearances--to the last item in the "Structure of a mission statement" segment: "What are the main objectives which support the company in accomplishing its mission" [of creating larger revenues]. There's a certain amount of creed involved--sometimes, maybe, to color the quality of greed. And many engaged in the philosophy of capitalism argue that greed need not be a derogatory term or unhealthy preoccupation amongst capitalists. Evidently, Ron Wayne, the rarely-mentioned third partner in the origin of Apple Computer, and the still-hippie, just back from India, Steve Jobs had long discussions on this very topic just before they launched Apple I and made history.

I didn't mean to imply that I thought the Michigan ruling was incorrect. It was perfectly correct. I just meant to point out one of the great conflicts of a Capitalist philosophy. The old saying is, history belongs to the winners, but so does philosophy, until new winners arise. You know, some like to call the 20th Century the American Century. As for the 21st...

I didn't take it as you though it was incorrect, but you termed it as Corporate Capitalism, which is a bit more specific than it needed to be. I took it more as a point of "big company gets put in place by court" which many people seem to like to see.

Yes, it was Henry Ford leading a big company who was put in his place.

Now that I've mentioned him, it occurs to me that the case of Ron Wayne has an interesting parallel to the Ford case. Because he was unnerved by the leadership and risk taking of Steve Jobs and desired to secure his money, just as the Ford shareholders were unnerved by Ford and desired to secure theirs, Ron Wayne lost out on becoming a billionaire. And evidently, even in hindsight, he has no regrets of his decision to opt out of the Apple partnership, because it was "the best decision available at that time". It was the perfectly correct decision. Funny how capitalism works sometimes. As in most worldviews, certain dogmas arise. When you lose out on that kind of money, you've gotta tell yourself something.

its funny, im learning about a lot of this in business class this semester. its pretty interesting stuff.

As interesting as it is, Fordism has been beaten to death in industry & academia... its time they took an interest in Appleism, and how a completely different business strategy can still be wildly successful.

I had to go look up FTW. I first guessed it might be what I see is called the biker version about the world. What's a man if he doesn't have a little biker at heart?

Then I did a search for Apple Mission Statement. Came up with it in five seconds:

"Apple is committed to bringing the best personal computing experience to students, educators, creative professionals and consumers around the world through its innovative hardware, software and Internet offerings."

See, no mention about making money at all. It's all altruism.

From their investor FAQ Page:

The key word here is 'leader'.