The Financial Post is reporting that Apple briefly moved past Exxon to become the most valuable publicly traded corporation in the United States, although it remains famously stingy.
On Tuesday, the tech company’s market capitalisation momentarily swerved ahead of the world’s largest oil company, with its market value rising to US$341.5-billion – just ahead of Exxon’s market capitalisation of US$341.4-billion.
A steep drop in oil prices combined with lingering fears of a double dip recession has given American investors the heebeegeebees, seeing Exxon shares falling by more than 17% since July 22.
However, over in Apple-land, the outlook is far rosier, with shares soaring 41% over the past 12 months, as consumers go ga-ga for the iPad and other shiny goods.
Loaded with cash but not leading by example
It’s a shame that such a stinking rich and hugely successful company as Apple doesn’t lead in other areas, like charity and the environment.
Apple’s refusal to allow users to make in-app donations to charities and non-profit organisations at the beginning of the year ended up with a government minister getting involved, and there seems scant evidence of the multi-billion company making meaningful charitable donations themselves.
Last year, even the Apple-loving the Cult Of Mac website were forced to admit that the company didn’t seem to give a hoot about global poverty:
In fact, to this day despite all the contacts I’ve made, I have yet to find a single person who knows anything Apple has funded or supported in the fight against global poverty.
[‘Does Steve Jobs Care About Global Poverty?‘]
Take an iDump
The record is no better when ot comes to the environment either, with Apple being named the ‘least green’ tech company‘ by Greenpeace, who dumped them at the bottom of green league table, and their record on labour rights isn’t exactly rosy either.
Despite making some fabulous products and some even more fabulous profits, surely it’s time for more people to be asking why the company doesn’t start giving something back to both its workers and the environment?