The iPhone maker announced last week that Lisa Jackson, its vice president of environment, policy, and social initiatives, will retire in January, while Kate Adams, who has served as general counsel since 2017, will retire late next year. These departures follow a cascade of recent exits including AI chief John Giannandrea, who announced his retirement this month, and Alan Dye, the head of user interface design since 2015, who left to join Meta. Bloomberg also reported that Johny Srouji, Apple’s chief chip architect for Apple Silicon, is mulling an exit, but the 61-year-old executive threw cold water on those rumors Monday, saying “I love my team, I love my job at Apple” in a memo to staffers.

Speaking of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg’s social media empire has been the beneficiary of Apple’s exodus. Billy Sorrentino, another senior design director, chose to leave for Meta with Dye, and Ruoming Pang, who headed Apple’s AI foundation models team, also left for Meta in July, taking approximately 100 engineers with him. Ke Yang, who led AI-driven web search for Siri, and Jian Zhang, Apple’s AI robotics lead, also left for Meta this year.

But perhaps the biggest change at the top this year has been Chief Operating Officer Jeff Williams, who decided to retire in July after 27 years with Apple. He was long considered the top candidate to succeed CEO Tim Cook. Also this summer, CFO Luca Maestri stepped back from his role to instead oversee corporate services starting in the new year, while Kevan Parekh took over as CFO.

Succession planning and Tim Cook’s future

The scale of the turnover has been striking, but the timing appears connected to succession planning. Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times have reported that Apple is ramping up efforts to prepare for Cook, who turned 65 in November, to potentially retire in 2026. He has led the company since 2011 and grown its market cap from roughly $350 billion to $4 trillion.

John Ternus, Apple’s senior vice president of hardware engineering, has emerged as the leading internal candidate to replace Cook. Ternus, 50, joined Apple’s product design team in 2001 and has overseen hardware engineering for every generation of iPad, the latest iPhone lineup, and AirPods. He played a crucial role in the Mac’s transition to Apple silicon.

The choice of Ternus would mark a departure from Apple’s recent operational focus under Cook. While Cook and Williams both had operational backgrounds with expertise in global supply chains, Ternus brings technical hardware expertise. His selection would signal that Apple is prioritizing product innovation as it faces challenges in new categories like the Vision Pro and competition in artificial intelligence.

Apple’s new AI leadership

Apple is bringing in Amar Subramanya, a veteran of both Google and Microsoft, to lead its AI efforts. Subramanya spent 16 years at Google, eventually becoming head of engineering for Google’s AI assistant Gemini, before a brief stint at Microsoft as corporate vice president of AI. He will oversee Apple Foundation Models, machine learning research, and AI safety, reporting to software chief Craig Federighi.

Subramanya’s hire signals Apple’s determination to accelerate its AI capabilities after falling behind competitors like Google and OpenAI. His experience building large language models at Google positions him to help Apple develop competitive generative AI products, a critical battleground for tech companies in the coming years.

Apple’s new design leadership

On the design front, Stephen Lemay is replacing Dye as the head of user interface design. Lemay has been with Apple since 1999 and played a key role in designing every major Apple interface from the original iPhone to the latest operating systems.

The promotion of Lemay has reportedly been met with enthusiasm inside Apple. Blogger and podcaster John Gruber, who has covered Apple for decades and has deep ties within the company, wrote that employees are borderline “giddy” about Lemay taking over.

“Sources I’ve spoken to who’ve worked with Lemay at Apple speak highly of him, particularly his attention to detail and craftsmanship,” Gruber wrote. “Those things have been sorely lacking in the Dye era.”

This internal promotion contrasts sharply with how Dye’s departure was received. Dye had overseen UI design for a decade but faced internal criticism over design direction and product quality. Lemay’s appointment represents a return to the company’s design-first philosophy that characterized Apple’s earlier innovation phases.

Apple’s new operations and supply chain leadership

Sabih Khan, who has been with Apple for 30 years, took over as chief operating officer in July, succeeding Williams. Khan joined the executive team as senior vice president of operations in 2019 and has overseen Apple’s global supply chain for the past six years. Khan will also now oversee environment and social initiatives, taking on some of Lisa Jackson’s former responsibilities.

Khan’s appointment represents continuity in operations while consolidating responsibilities across the executive suite. His deep knowledge of Apple’s manufacturing and logistics networks positions him to navigate ongoing supply chain challenges, particularly as the company diversifies production beyond China.

Apple’s new legal and regulatory leadership

Jennifer Newstead, currently Meta’s chief legal officer and a former legal adviser to the U.S. State Department, will become Apple’s general counsel on March 1, 2026. In a consolidation of responsibilities, Newstead will oversee both legal and government affairs, effectively merging the roles previously held by Adams and Jackson.

Newstead brings significant international law and regulatory expertise at a critical time for Apple. The company faces increasing scrutiny from antitrust regulators worldwide, particularly in the European Union and the United States. The Justice Department and 16 attorneys general filed an antitrust suit against Apple last March, alleging the company’s policies hamper competition and make it difficult for consumers to switch phones. A trial date is not yet set, but suffice to say Newstead’s work will be cut out for her once she starts.

Her appointment underscores Apple’s focus on navigating complex regulatory environments while addressing regulatory challenges around AI development and data privacy. Her experience in government affairs at Meta, where she managed relations with policymakers globally, makes her well-suited to handle Apple’s expanding regulatory obligations.

Apple’s new financial leadership

Kevan Parekh assumed the chief financial officer role on January 1, 2025, replacing Luca Maestri, who had held the position since 2014. Parekh brought deep familiarity with Apple’s financial operations, having worked in the company’s finance division previously. His transition to CFO continues Apple’s pattern of promoting experienced insiders to top roles, though his tenure also reflects the company’s need for steady financial stewardship amid market volatility and shifting investor expectations.

Apple’s inflection point

The departures span functions critical to Apple’s competitive position. Beyond the visible departures, Apple has lost significant talent in AI research to its competition in Silicon Valley, namely Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI. Apple is attempting to address this through high-profile hires like Subramanya, but the scale of departures suggests internal friction or strategic shifts that pushed executives to explore opportunities elsewhere.

The consolidation of responsibilities—particularly having Newstead oversee both legal and government affairs, and Khan handling operations and environmental initiatives—suggests Apple is also tightening its executive structure. This could be driven by cost considerations or by a desire to create clearer lines of authority as the company prepares for potential leadership transitions.

Despite the upheaval, Apple is positioning these changes as strategic rather than reactive. The transitions of Williams, Maestri, and others were described as “long-planned successions” in company announcements. Cook has publicly praised the incoming leaders and emphasized continuity, even as Apple assembles what amounts to an entirely new leadership team for its next chapter.

Cook himself remains a question mark. While some reports suggest he could retire in 2026, the executive has been adamant about his plans. In January, Cook told CNBC he would never retire, at least in “the traditional way,” adding he would “always want to work.” Still, all the reliable reporting since that on-air interview points to scenarios in which Cook will step back from day-to-day operations.

Looking ahead

Whether this new generation can maintain Apple’s innovation momentum while navigating AI competition, regulatory pressure, and the eventual departure of Cook himself remains the defining question for the company’s future. The success of Ternus, Newstead, Lemay, Khan, and Subramanya will determine whether Apple can accelerate its AI capabilities, maintain design excellence, navigate regulatory challenges, and sustain the company’s position as one of the world’s leading tech companies.

The changes also reflect a shift in Apple’s strategic priorities. Under Cook, the company has excelled in operational efficiency and global supply chain management. But under Ternus—if he indeed becomes CEO—the company may place greater emphasis on hardware innovation and product differentiation, particularly in emerging categories where AI and design intersect.

The appointment of Subramanya to lead AI, combined with the return of Stephen Lemay to design, suggests Apple is doubling down on what made it successful in the first place: breakthrough products with cutting-edge technology with thoughtful design.

It all suggests 2026 will be a pivotal year for Apple, which is expected to accelerate its AI efforts, roll out new phone designs, and fend off regulators to secure long-term positioning in the rapidly changing landscape.

For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

In a separate regulatory filing, Paramount disclosed that Affinity Partners, the private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, is part of the bid. It added that sovereign wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, and Qatar are also participating.

Affinity and the other outside financing partners have agreed to forgo any governance rights, which Paramount said means the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States would have no jurisdiction over the transaction. Meanwhile, Chinese tech conglomerate Tencent is no longer a partner.

The offer comes after Paramount lost out in the bidding war for the assets last week to Netflix, which made a cash-and-stock deal worth $27.75 per share. Paramount’s proposed transaction is for the entirety of WBD, including the Global Networks segment, while Netflix’s deal is for the studio and HBO Max.

Paramount argued its offer to WBD shareholders provides a superior alternative to the Netflix transaction, which offers “inferior and uncertain value and exposes WBD shareholders to a protracted multi-jurisdictional regulatory clearance process with an uncertain outcome,” referring to the likely antitrust concerns for Netflix’s megadeal.

At the Kennedy Center over the weekend, President Donald Trump partially confirmed reporting from Bloomberg’s Lucas Shaw about his private conversations with Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos, saying they had met in the Oval Office before Netflix announced its winning bid, while adding that its combined market share with WBD could be an antitrust concern.

Paramount argued that WBD’s recommendation of the Netflix offer is based on an “illusory prospective valuation of Global Networks that is unsupported by the business fundamentals” and encumbered by high levels of financial leverage assigned to the entity. Netflix’s offer would assume $11 billion of debt and involve a $59 billion bridge loan, which Bloomberg reported was among the highest ever.

David Ellison, chairman and CEO of Paramount, said: “WBD shareholders deserve an opportunity to consider our superior all-cash offer for their shares in the entire company.”

Paramount, which earlier sent a letter to WBD CEO David Zaslav complaining of a “tainted” sale process, further asserted today that although Paramount made six offers for WBD over 12 weeks, “WBD never engaged meaningfully with these proposals, which we believe deliver the best outcome for WBD shareholders.

“We believe our offer will create a stronger Hollywood. It is in the best interests of the creative community, consumers, and the movie theater industry. We believe they will benefit from the enhanced competition, higher content spend and theatrical release output, and a greater number of movies in theaters as a result of our proposed transaction,” Ellison continued. “We look forward to working to expeditiously deliver this opportunity so that all stakeholders can begin to capitalize on the benefits of the combined company.”

Paramount’s tender offer is scheduled to expire at 5 p.m. ET on Jan. 8, 2026. The company said its offer will be financed by new equity backstopped by Paramount’s well-capitalized principal equity holders, and $54 billion of debt commitments from Bank of America, Citi, and Apollo.

Centerview Partners and RedBird Advisors are acting as lead financial advisors to Paramount, and Bank of America Securities, Citi, and M. Klein & Co. are also acting as financial advisors. Cravath Swaine & Moore and Latham & Watkins are acting as legal counsel to Paramount.

Disclosure: The author worked at Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.

Although it’s often also referred to as the “Billionaire’s Pledge,” other wealthy donors have committed to the endeavor. One of the latest signatories is Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, who announced on LinkedIn this weekend he’s officially joining the Giving Pledge.

“Okay, I’ve formally signed up for the Giving Pledge, sometimes considered the Billionaire’s Pledge, though I’ve never been a billionaire, particularly after I gave away all my Craigslist equity to my charitable foundation,” Newmark wrote. “Seems like a good way to officially enter my middle seventies, which I’ve done today.”

Newark built his fortune by founding popular online marketplace Craiglist in 1995. It started as an email list for local San Francisco residents, but turned into an online classifieds page the following year. Today, Craigslist is estimated to be worth about $3 billion. 

“This all feels like a follow up to my decision in early 1999 to monetize Craigslist as little as possible,” Newmark said of signing Giving Pledge. “The best estimate so far is that I turned down around $11B that bankers and VCs wanted to throw at me. I still made plenty after that.”

In 2020, Forbes estimated Newmark’s net worth at $1.3 billion, although in 2022 he said he’d give away most of his fortune to charitable causes. There aren’t more recent estimates of his net worth, but he emphasized in his LinkedIn post he is not a billionaire.

His foundation, Craig Newmark Philanthropies, mostly supports cybersecurity and veterans causes. And in his post committing to the Giving Pledge, Newmark said he’d continue making similar donations. 

“My focus is where I can do some actual good in neglected areas, like for military families and vets, like fighting cyberattacks and preventing scams,” he wrote. “Also, a little for pigeon rescue.”

Wait, what?

Newmark is also dedicated to rescuing pigeons. 

“I love birds, have a sense of humor, and I suspect that pigeons may become our replacement species,” he told the Associated Press in 2023.

His favorite neighborhood pigeon is named Ghostface Killah, who is featured in a painting on his mantle at home. 

He said he developed his love for pigeons in the mid-1980s when he lived in Detroit. Pigeons are “the underdog,” he told NYU’s student newspaper Washington Square News. 

“They’re the grassroots, most prominent bird and possibly our successor species,” Newmark said. “But pigeons are, well, I identify with them as well. I grew up with no money, living across the street from a junkyard.”

Early this year, Newmark donated $30,000 to San Francisco-based pigeon rescue Palomacy, which was the largest donation the organization had ever received. 

“Craig Newmark is many things: the founder of craigslist, an ‘accidental entrepreneur,’ a self-proclaimed old-school nerd, a full-time philanthropist and a life-long lover of pigeons,” Palomacy said in January. “We so appreciate the support they provide our feathered friends.”

With Newmark’s donation, Palomacy can continue to “save hundreds of pigeons and doves through hands-on rescue, rehabilitation, and rehoming in Northern California,” according to the organization. “We are reversing the unfair stigma against pigeons and showing the world they deserve our respect and protection.”

Recent criticisms of the Giving Pledge

Although there undoubtedly are some billionaires and other high-net-worth individuals who are genuinely committed to the Giving Pledge, there has been recent criticism many of the signatories aren’t living up to the pledge. Even Melinda French Gates, one of its founders, recently said people could be doing more. 

“Have they given enough? No,” she said in a recent interview with Wired.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last week also called the Giving Pledge a failure—but for different reasons. He said it was “well intentioned,” but was “very amorphous” and claimed wealthy people made the commitment out of fear that the public would “come at it with pitchforks.” Bessent also pointed out that not many billionaires have actually delivered on their promise to donate their fortunes. 

Warren Buffett, another Giving Pledge founder, also recently admitted he had to rethink some of his original philanthropic plans.

“Early on, I contemplated various grand philanthropic plans. Though I was stubborn, these did not prove feasible,” he wrote in a recent letter to shareholders. “During my many years, I’ve also watched ill-conceived wealth transfers by political hacks, dynastic choices, and, yes, inept or quirky philanthropists.” 

Several studies have also poked holes in the Giving Pledge, showing how it’s benefitted billionaires by presenting themselves as generous and public‑spirited, but doesn’t question inequalities and tax rules that led to such massive wealth in the first place.

The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) argues the Giving Pledge is “unfulfilled, unfulfillable, and not our ticket to a fairer, better future.” 

To be sure, many wealthy signatories like Newmark appear to be genuinely committed to the cause. 

“Like I say, a nerd’s gotta do what a nerd’s gotta do, and a nerd should practice what he preaches,” Newmark wrote over the weekend.