Chamath’s claim has two parts: (1) that there would be sustained employee political/activist movements and internal petitions at Apple, and (2) that these would eventually show up negatively in Apple’s operating results (growth, margins, or similar metrics).

The first part clearly happened. Since 2021 Apple has seen visible internal activism, including the #AppleToo movement over workplace mistreatment and pay equity, followed by organizing under the "Apple Together" banner, which led to petitions, open letters, and even a small retail walkout. (en.wikipedia.org) In 2022, Apple Together organized widely reported internal petitions and public letters against Apple’s return‑to‑office mandates, explicitly framing them as issues of worker wellbeing and diversity. (theguardian.com)

The second part—whether this activism has measurably hurt Apple’s operating results by late 2025—is much harder to establish. Apple’s headline financials from fiscal 2021–2024 show very high and relatively stable profitability: revenue rose sharply from 2020 to 2022 and then stayed near that higher level, while operating margins increased from about 24% in 2020 to around 30–32% in the years after the activism began. (devyara.com) Recent reports for 2025 likewise describe record or near‑record revenues, net income, and strong gross margins, driven by iPhone and services growth, not by any evident drag from internal dissent. (investopedia.com) Where analysts and management do flag material risks to Apple’s earnings, they emphasize regulatory and antitrust issues (e.g., the Google search deal, App Store litigation) and tariffs, not employee activism or internal petitions. (barrons.com)

Because Apple’s results remain very strong and any financial effect of activism is (if it exists) too small to separately identify—and because no clear causal link or attribution is made in filings, earnings commentary, or mainstream analysis—there is no objective way, as of November 2025, to say that the activism has clearly shown up as a negative in operating results. At the same time, we also cannot prove that it has not had any impact at the margin, or that it will not in the future, especially since the prediction did not include a time limit.

Given this combination—documented activism, strong financial performance, and no clear, quantifiable connection between the two—the status of the prediction is ambiguous rather than definitively right, wrong, or simply "too early."