> That $77B that is now returned to shareholders can be spent on whatever those shareholders want. It isn't really Apple's money to begin with... kind of the issue with being a public company.
Apple and its shareholders are the same entity when discussing “whose” money it is. If shareholders want it used to do buybacks, they vote for company leadership to do that. If they want dividends, they vote for company leadership to do that. If they want to invest in travel to Mars, they vote for leadership to do that.
Saying Apple’s money belongs to shareholders is a meaningless statement. It belongs to the collection of shareholders as a whole, who have opted to elect in leaders to decide how to spend it.
Well. With such large firms, shareholders are quite a stretch of distribution. Voting proxies and the complexity of introducing a shareholder vote proposal quite drastically restricts the number of shareholders who can make stuff happen at these firms.
That is how ownership in a public company works. The more you own, the more control you have. Before you purchase, you will know what percentage you will own and you have to predict if it will be enough to enable you to accomplish your goals. Or you have to make friends with other shareholders.
Apple and its shareholders are the same entity when discussing “whose” money it is. If shareholders want it used to do buybacks, they vote for company leadership to do that. If they want dividends, they vote for company leadership to do that. If they want to invest in travel to Mars, they vote for leadership to do that.
Saying Apple’s money belongs to shareholders is a meaningless statement. It belongs to the collection of shareholders as a whole, who have opted to elect in leaders to decide how to spend it.