Anderson Blames Jobs In Backdating

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

In an interesting twist to the high-profile stock options backdating probe that has been ongoing for over a year at Apple, former CFO Fred Anderson is claiming that he warned Apple CEO Steve Jobs about the financial and legal repercussions of his backdated option grant, and that Jobs had given him assurances that the grant was board-approved.

The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117743578584680696.html?mod=Technology) (Paid Subscription Required) has Mr. Anderson's full statement, which in part reads:

Fred was told by Steve Jobs in late January 2001 that Mr. Jobs had the agreement of the Board of Directors for the Executive Team grant on January 2, 2001. At the time Mr. Jobs provided Fred this assurance, Fred cautioned Mr. Jobs that the Executive Team grant would have to be priced based on the date of the actual Board agreement or there could be an accounting charge. He further advised Mr. Jobs that the Board would have to confirm its prior approval in a legally satisfactory method. He was told by Mr. Jobs that the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it. Fred relied on these statements by Mr. Jobs and from them concluded the grant was being properly handled.

The SEC has yet to respond to these specific allegations. A previous report (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/21/jobs-likely-to-avoid-criminal-charges-in-options-probe/) by Mercury News indicated that there has been a lack of evidence to support criminal charges against Mr. Jobs.

Anderson has recently settled (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/24/sec-settles-with-anderson-pursuing-heinen/) with the SEC regarding his involvement in the ordeal, having admitted no guilt but having to pay a $150,000 fine in addition to paying back the received grants. Separately, the SEC is pursuing legal action against former general counsel Nancy Heinen, which she plans to contest.

[longofest]

This makes me wonder if that Mercury News report was accurate. If it was, then the SEC may still pursue civil action against him.

[johnee]

based on what i've read, the SEC says this is false. but it's still early.

He needs to have verifiable proof or nothing will happen.

[rtdunham]

so did anderson escape jail time by agreeing to testify against jobs? i don't imagine it'll be long before we find out.

[bearbo]

i actually wouldn't be that surprised if steve did do that, just based on his confidence and all that.

but again, i'm not based on any real proof

[IJ Reilly]

This makes me wonder if that Mercury News report was accurate. If it was, then the SEC may still pursue civil action against him.

The Merc News reporting was essentially a rehash of material we've seen before, presented in somewhat more detail. IMO it relies too heavily on unnamed sources to be fully reliable. It seems likely that Anderson made this statement in connection with his plea agreement. Can the SEC pursue a civil action? I don't think so.

[nagromme]

"the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it."

Maybe I'm reading something wrong, but it sounds more like Anderson is "blaming" the Board, and Jobs was just the messenger in that conversation. Unless Jobs lied to Anderson about the Board's approval/verification--but Anderson doesn't seem to be saying that.

I'm sure everyone involved--guilty and innocent alike--is trying to deflect blame or the appearance of blame. I wonder if we'll ever know who REALLY acted with intent to defraud?

[johnee]

well Anderson cried mommy and settled.

Let's see if the other person who hasn't settled has something to defend her/him self with (not sure if it's a man or woman).

[Rocketman]

In listening to the details carefully, this is Andersen's post-settlement lash-out PR release so when he goes on to run his new investmnt fund, his new associates can point to somebody to explain why he had to settle with SEC.

Notably SEC justified their hands-off approach regarding Jobs by citing the immediate and full cooperation they received from Apple and all the remaining ployees there (after the key players in the drama resigned.

The whole SEC involvement in this is anti-stockholder interest and in an area (options pricing) which in effect has no "losers" in a stock with such large daily transaction volumes as Apple has. The "dilutive effect" is nearly unmeasureable and has "no impact" on the market for the stock.

So I can see why he is pised to give $35,000,000 "back". My question is who got the $35m? Apple, Apple stockholders, or the SEC. Wanna place a bet?

Rocketman

[jessep28]

As the Martha Stewart and Richard Scrushy cases show, it's often very difficult to prove intent in securities cases.

Scrushy successfully was able to pull the "I didn't order the numbers to be fixed" defense in his criminal trial. Granted there were civil matters, but he isn't in jail and his house and other items are shielded from garnishment.

Stewart just was placed in jail for lying to Fed officials and not for insider trading in the ImClone case.

Jobs is claiming of course that he didn't order the options to be backdated, that only he "discussed it" thus he should be absolved from liability and blame should be shifted to the board and Apple's lead council.

[lkrupp]

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:

[hob]

the first time this came up i thought "crikey, I think Jobs is done for"... but I let it go...

every time it comes up again I get a similar gut reaction...

now I'm really starting to wonder... could this all bite Steve in the ass?

[jessep28]

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:

Jobs could still be retained, he just can't be a corporate officer or serve on a board.

That's what Stewart did with Martha Stewart Omnimedia.

[DaBrain]

A "he said she said" scenario. Wonder what the outcome will be. One would suspect more than a verbal accusation would be needed here if they were to charge SJ. We shall see!

Could be just sour grapes and then maybe not!:eek:

[GanleyBurger]

.
No new hardware. Silly...

[nagromme]

the first time this came up i thought "crikey, I think Jobs is done for"... but I let it go...

every time it comes up again I get a similar gut reaction...

now I'm really starting to wonder... could this all bite Steve in the ass?

It could--I don't know how anybody could be sure otherwise. Then again, he could fall down a well or a hundred other things. Those who seem to know more than I aren't worried about Jobs' implication, but if he DID do wrong then he should pay the price as the law dictates. He'll make it through that ordeal, and Apple will make it through his absence. Any absence would hurt Apple and its products, and I hope it doesn't come to that--but there's a lot of talent at Apple besides just Jobs, and they can follow through with the projects Jobs has overseen.

And Jobs WILL leave Apple someday, no matter what.

[johnee]

.
Hey! More no new hardware news!!! :eek:

Maybe they will release hardware to distract everyone!

[johnee]

It could--I don't know how anybody could be sure otherwise. Then again, he could fall down a well or a hundred other things. Those who seem to know more than I aren't worried about Jobs' implication, but if he DID do wrong then he should pay the price as the law dictates. He'll make it through that ordeal, and Apple will make it through his absence. Any absence would hurt Apple and its products, and I hope it doesn't come to that--but there's a lot of talent at Apple besides just Jobs, and they can follow through with the projects Jobs has overseen.

And Jobs WILL leave Apple someday, no matter what.

Hence the reason I opened this thread!

Who do you think will replace Steve Jobs? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=299420)

[Amdahl]

I wonder if we'll ever know who REALLY acted with intent to defraud?

Well, gee, so far the primary candidates are Steve Jobs, who is a God and controls Apple with an iron fist, and little ole CFO Anderson.. Gee, I wonder who would pull off something like this???

[jessep28]

And Jobs WILL leave Apple someday, no matter what.


Yeah, that is true. Unfortunately, i think Apple's greatness at least in the minds of many is tied to Jobs. Jobs is Apple and Apple is Jobs.

We all saw successors back when Jobs 1.0 left Apple run the company into the ground until Jobs 2.0 came in and brought the company to where it is now.

Another case - Wal-Mart. Sam Walton wanted to bring Everyday Low Prices to the masses and strived to achieve that. After he left the company, the management used Wal-Mart's power to attempt and make it a global powerhouse in the retail world.

Unfortunately for Wally World, its grown too big and is falling apart from the inside.

Many are questioning Berkshire Hathaway's future when Warren Buffett leaves.

[papadopolis1024]

Screw him he is just DUMB!


He has no proof and no explanation so I dont think anyone will look back

[Rocketman]

Who do you think will replace Steve Jobs?

That guy who did the Time Machine demo hopefully.

The villian in this story is the SEC and a "zero tolerance legal culture". This could have been resolved with 10 letters and a check 5 years ago if all SEC cared about was asking the players to "bring their position to fairness". The SEC's real goal is to justify their existence in a political context through fines, actual or threatened criminal charges, and "give backs" (shakedowns) in the millions of dollars which the SEC itself absorbs. Isn't that evidence of a "second crime"? In that context it is the SEC itself "cheating the victims" of their due.

Isn't sovereign immunity great!?!

Rocketman

[LagunaSol]

So I can see why he is pised to give $35,000,000 "back". My question is who got the $35m?

Actually, it's $3.5 million...

[twoodcc]

i think it's kinda fishy that he says this right after settling.....

[epochblue]

i think it's kinda fishy that he says this right after settling.....

Agreed. Sounds a lot like, "Okay, I'll pay, but it wasn't me, it was.....ummm......STEVE! Yeah, Steve did it!"

Edit: To be clear, I'm not saying that Jobs isn't (or can't be) guilty. As remarkable as Jobs is, if he did this, he should suffer the consequences. I'm just saying that the situation as it stands currently is slightly fishy.

[Peace]

As I said in a different discussion on this matter Nancy Heinin is NOT plea bargaining and is fighting the SEC in court.She says the CEO ( Jobs) TOLD her to do it.

[Abstract]

I thought it was a bit strange when MR reported that he was found to be not connected to this mix-up. I always thought he'd be found guilty.

Maybe they will release hardware to distract everyone!

"Well, on one hand, Steve Jobs is guilty. On the other hand, he just released MacBook Pro updates, so........we'll let him go this time."

[chicagdan]

Screw him he is just DUMB!


He has no proof and no explanation so I dont think anyone will look back

I'm so sick of you stupid, warped drones. You worship a piece of plastic and silicon as if it's the monolith from 2001 and refuse to believe anything your sainted Steve Jobs does could ever be wrong. If this charge is true, Steve Jobs ought to be thrown in jail. You children who have never owned a share of stock or owned underwater options (I still have 1000 of them from IBM issued in 1999 ... anyone want 1000 IBM shares at 148? Didn't think so.) you obviously don't understand the pure greedy criminality of this act. Anyone guilty of options backdating ought to be dragged through the streets for his pathetic, borderless greed.

[LagunaSol]

I'm so sick of you stupid, warped drones. You worship a piece of plastic and silicon as if it's the monolith from 2001 and refuse to believe anything your sainted Steve Jobs does could ever be wrong. If this charge is true, Steve Jobs ought to be thrown in jail. You children who have never owned a share of stock or owned underwater options (I still have 1000 of them from IBM issued in 1999 ... anyone want 1000 IBM shares at 148? Didn't think so.) you obviously don't understand the pure greedy criminality of this act. Anyone guilty of options backdating ought to be dragged through the streets for his pathetic, borderless greed.

I own AAPL stock and it's done just fine for me, thanks. And frankly, I'm not looking forward to the big hit on my stock if Jobs is officially implicated/prosecuted. Can you honestly say the shareholders have been negatively affected by this options grant that was never exercised, or that we've suffered financially with Jobs at the helm? Please.

BTW, options backdating is NOT a criminal act.

[clevin]

Steve "God" Jobs isn't actually god, no need to go out of way to defend a businessman who only cares about your money. dog bites dog, just wait and see.

[IJ Reilly]

We all saw successors back when Jobs 1.0 left Apple run the company into the ground until Jobs 2.0 came in and brought the company to where it is now.

Jobs 1.0 is the person who ran the company into the ground.

[chicagdan]

And frankly, I'm not looking forward to the big hit on my stock if Jobs is officially implicated/prosecuted.

Yes and that's why America is a rapidly declining empire, Rome in fast forward. All greed is fine, just as long as it doesn't personally affect me. Sooner or later someone's illegal or unethical or just plain sleezy act will personally affect you, but please don't whine to the government or anyone's social conscience because when the time came for noble souls to put their ethics over their bank accounts, you've already made your choice.

[ricksbrain]

Jobs 1.0 is the person who ran the company into the ground.

Really? Interesting take, I suppose. There's no real evidence of that, but sure whatever... We can ignore the profit-taking that came after him, the lack of focus, the Copland fiasco, Scully's and Amelio's admitted mistakes.

But yeah, like I said... whatever. Lately, the truth seems to take a back seat to personal opinion.

Oh, and the America in decline thing... hm, such a solidly researched and supported assertion. How profound.

I'm so glad I came here today. I learned that thinking is still in the hands of a privileged few. Yay for realizations.

[EagerDragon]

I figured this was going to happen in order to get a lower punishment for pointing the finger a Jobs. However I figure it was going to be Nancy the one doing it.

This sounds bad.

[Amdahl]

I'm just saying that the situation as it stands currently is slightly fishy.

Not really; this is how it always goes. The guilty parties keep their lips zipped until after they've figured out their strategy and secured a deal from the prosecutor. The SEC will now have access to whatever material the CFO has in order to go after the lawyer, or the CEO, or whomever else is implicated.

[Amdahl]

As I said in a different discussion on this matter Nancy Heinin is NOT plea bargaining and is fighting the SEC in court.She says the CEO ( Jobs) TOLD her to do it.

And I believe her. She didn't make the whole thing up on her own. But her problem is going to be that #1) She is a lawyer and knows better and #2) Being told by a client/employer to break the law is no defense. She should be disbarred as well, and that is exactly what will happen if the SEC wins the case against her.

[EagerDragon]

"the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it."

Maybe I'm reading something wrong, but it sounds more like Anderson is "blaming" the Board, and Jobs was just the messenger in that conversation. Unless Jobs lied to Anderson about the Board's approval/verification--but Anderson doesn't seem to be saying that.

I'm sure everyone involved--guilty and innocent alike--is trying to deflect blame or the appearance of blame. I wonder if we'll ever know who REALLY acted with intent to defraud?

I would think that as the CFO he would have access to the board and the board records. As the CFO it was his responsability to ensure that he had the correct authority in writting before acting on it.

[ClaphamChris]

A shame - although very predictable - that it's all getting nasty.

Fred's not really doing himself much of a favour here though IMO. Much as I respect a lot of the work he did at Apple, does he really think that the chances of future directorships will be enhanced by his argument that "I was told it was OK, so I just went ahead and did it?". No chief finance officer in any company I've worked for would do it - they'd check everything twice before laying themselves on the line professionally. It surprises me Fred did differently. He's no fool.

Nancy on the other hand is very interesting. She thinks she's got a strong enough case, which you've got to guess implicates Steve Jobs directly.

Fun times ahead. But Fred's just screwed himself over in that statement in my book. As if he wasn't screwed enough already....

[EagerDragon]

In listening to the details carefully, this is Andersen's post-settlement lash-out PR release so when he goes on to run his new investmnt fund, his new associates can point to somebody to explain why he had to settle with SEC.

Notably SEC justified their hands-off approach regarding Jobs by citing the immediate and full cooperation they received from Apple and all the remaining ployees there (after the key players in the drama resigned.

The whole SEC involvement in this is anti-stockholder interest and in an area (options pricing) which in effect has no "losers" in a stock with such large daily transaction volumes as Apple has. The "dilutive effect" is nearly unmeasureable and has "no impact" on the market for the stock.

So I can see why he is pised to give $35,000,000 "back". My question is who got the $35m? Apple, Apple stockholders, or the SEC. Wanna place a bet?

Rocketman

I bet on SEC or the goverment.

[Amdahl]

Can you honestly say the shareholders have been negatively affected by this options grant that was never exercised, or that we've suffered financially with Jobs at the helm? Please.I will agree with you here; in the short to mid term, Jobs has raised the value of the stock more than his criminality took from it. The problem is while YOU might have gained, people who bought the stock during the time in question are the ones who would have been the victims.

BTW, options backdating is NOT a criminal act.It is when you forge the documents and fake the board meeting that were intended to grant the options.

[EagerDragon]

That guy who did the Time Machine demo hopefully.

The villian in this story is the SEC and a "zero tolerance legal culture". This could have been resolved with 10 letters and a check 5 years ago if all SEC cared about was asking the players to "bring their position to fairness". The SEC's real goal is to justify their existence in a political context through fines, actual or threatened criminal charges, and "give backs" (shakedowns) in the millions of dollars which the SEC itself absorbs. Isn't that evidence of a "second crime"? In that context it is the SEC itself "cheating the victims" of their due.

Isn't sovereign immunity great!?!

Rocketman

Sounds a lot like the Salem trials. anyone found guilty of witchcraft go to forfit their lands and possessions. Lets see .... SEC accusses and SEC get to keep the spoils. Ummmmm.

[Rocketman]

As I said in a different discussion on this matter Nancy Heinin is NOT plea bargaining and is fighting the SEC in court.She says the CEO ( Jobs) TOLD her to do it.

Given her alleged culpability (over an issue that was LEGAL at the time, and the issue becomes how that conflicts with IRS specific accounting principals, as distinct from commercial reality and other layers of regulations.

My only question is if she will be "allowed" to serve in the future. (and where the shakedown money actually goes)

Rocketman

[Counter]

i actually wouldn't be that surprised if steve did do that, just based on his confidence and all that.

but again, i'm not based on any real proof

My thoughts too.

I hope he hasn't, but I can just imagine him doing it. If I had to put money on either way, I'd put money on him having done it without a doubt.

[Digital Skunk]

Really? Interesting take, I suppose. There's no real evidence of that, but sure whatever... We can ignore the profit-taking that came after him, the lack of focus, the Copland fiasco, Scully's and Amelio's admitted mistakes.

But yeah, like I said... whatever. Lately, the truth seems to take a back seat to personal opinion.

Oh, and the America in decline thing... hm, such a solidly researched and supported assertion. How profound.

I'm so glad I came here today. I learned that thinking is still in the hands of a privileged few. Yay for realizations.

:eek: :eek: How could you tell someone the truth like that! You know people here have no actual reason to learn the truth about anything. You have to watch yourself or they may actually respond and tell you how they feel and give their opinions about you and your comments. Then they might even try to support their opinions with incorrect facts and links to youtube and myspace. Then worst yet... they will try to tell you how your are wrong and give even more incorrect facts to back them up.

Anyway. This stock thing has been blown out of proportion. Last time I checked this was a rumors site... not the New York Times or Business Week. Give my my product update rumors and Leopard rumors. If I want political/journalistic issues I will read a real newspaper or news site. And it's funny how the Admins will post this actual factual journalism/governmental stuff then remove posts when we start talking about ethics, philosophy, and politics... WTF:mad:

That's why they should only post RUMORS

sheesh!

[LagunaSol]

It is when you forge the documents and fake the board meeting that were intended to grant the options.

Yes, but I was responding to the post that stated that options granting in general is illegal.

I'm not saying Jobs shouldn't be held accountable if he did, in fact, do something wrong, but some of these posters are crying for blood as if they have the actual facts of the case.

[Peace]

Given her alleged culpability (over an issue that was LEGAL at the time, and the issue becomes how that conflicts with IRS specific accounting principals, as distinct from commercial reality and other layers of regulations.

My only question is if she will be "allowed" to serve in the future. (and where the shakedown money actually goes)

Rocketman

The SEC is taking her to court and will be asking that she be kept from practicing again.

[swingerofbirch]

If Steve Jobs is found guilty of a crime I hope that I can count on all of you to help overturn the law that he was found guilty of breaking and create a new retroactive law that gives him immunity to having broken said law. Steve Jobs inherently in who he is cannot break the law. The law must be moved and changed according to where he walks.

NOT!

That's what an Apple apologist or "sympathizer" might say. I say it's time we hold Apple's feet to the fire. When Fred Anderson left Apple, Jobs heaped praise at him. It reminds me of how Bush lets people go as they start getting investigated to the point that they could be linked to him. And then chalks it up to needing to spend more time with the family. Trust me, no family wants to spend more time with the sort of cronies Bush has got working for him. What I am saying is this: was Anderson the fall guy?

Now if Jobs is in trouble I hope he takes his lumps like Martha Stewart. She is a remarkable example of how a CEO can take lumps and come back stronger. In Jobs' commencement speech at Stanfordf, he talked about how all these seemingly bad things happened to him that actually led to great successes later. Maybe spending a little time in the clink will give Jobs a great idea for Mac OS XI. Who knows!

All's I know is this: I'm not an Apple apologist, and I don't think it benefits Apple to get away with anything. I think an honest fresh start is the most fertile ground for a company like Apple.

[Rocketman]

The SEC is taking her to court and will be asking that she be kept from practicing again.

"Law" or "corporate officer"?

Being disbarred alone would be good for her value.

As for the folks claiming there are Jobs fanbois, let me say this. The real issue here is legal conduct and selective enforcement. To get to SE thay have to claim "lie under investigation", not a violation of any underlying rule, law, regulation or ethic. And I assure you, there are plenty of varieties of those.

Rocketman

[Dont Hurt Me]

The elite class doing what they do, heck as its been said you get more time stealing a loaf of bread.

[Peace]

Yes and that's why America is a rapidly declining empire, Rome in fast forward. All greed is fine, just as long as it doesn't personally affect me. Sooner or later someone's illegal or unethical or just plain sleezy act will personally affect you, but please don't whine to the government or anyone's social conscience because when the time came for noble souls to put their ethics over their bank accounts, you've already made your choice.

I made my choice and my ethics were far above the sleazy acts of the US Government.

[ulyssespdx]

the SEC doesn't "respond" to a former employee saying "hey, my former boss said to me that it was okay."

c'mon, folks. this guy left Apple under a cloud. suddenly, Steve Jobs is involved in every minute detail of the company's stock option accounting?

uh-huh. yeah. ooh. big "conspiracy."

slow news day?

this entire thing is one uber-hyped blamefest. hyped mostly by the media, that is.

[AidenShaw]

Suddenly, Steve Jobs is involved in every minute detail of the company's stock option accounting?

But, people here often assume that The Steve is involved in every other tiny little detail of the company - it stretches the imagination to think that he wasn't paying attention to hundreds of millions of dollars of stock options. :eek:

[GanleyBurger]

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:

Don't worry. If Apple crumbles, Macs will become collectors items. To keep them going strong, we'll have to start ripping them apart like PCs to work on them.

Then, we will start a website called MacMemories. We'll all be like 80 years old and we'll chat about the good ol' days, about how stupid Steve was, risking it all for a little gain.

Then we'll complain about our corns, our sore thumbs, and our failing eyesight... destroyed by staring at 30" monitors.

We'll hit people with our canes... and the handles will be carved into the shape of Apple symbols...

We'll rule the nursing homes!!!!!!!!!:eek: :eek: :eek:

[Rot'nApple]

the SEC doesn't "respond" to a former employee saying "hey, my former boss said to me that it was okay."

c'mon, folks. this guy left Apple under a cloud. suddenly, Steve Jobs is involved in every minute detail of the company's stock option accounting?

uh-huh. yeah. ooh. big "conspiracy."

CEO Jeff Skilling left Enron suddenly, leaving Ken Lay to be involved also. And as he touted the company stock and that it's trading price will bounce back up, he was busy selling his! And we all know how Enron turned out!:eek:

Not saying this is "Enron 2", but I think all executives of major corporations need to see the perp walks of handcuffed executives, such as Jeff Skilling, Ken Lay, Andy Fastow, heading to trial, lest they forget. It does a body good!:rolleyes:

[GanleyBurger]

.

[Doctor Q]

Between Jobs and Anderson, we seem to have a he-said-he-said situation. Personally, I never believe anybody named Mr. Anderson. ;)

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:Yes, I've been working on it since I saw your post. Thanks for the warning. I've got my first interview (http://linuxrumors.com/) tomorrow.

[LoganT]

I can imagine Jobs meditating and giving words of wisdom to his fellow inmates.

[iMikeT]

The guy settles and he comes out crying and pointing the finger...

Isn't there a clause somewhere called "No cry babies"?

[surferfromuk]

Apple is a great company.

Rumours and talk are cheap - PROOF is a whole lot harder to come by.

Let me reassure all those tempted to enter into a dialogue with the apocalyptic doomsayers that have creeped out of the woodwork that the 'sky is most defintately NOT falling in'.

And taking a slightly different view of history - say let's zoom out and look at the last 30 and the next 30 years -

and say ;

SO WHAT if Jobs, the board, Fred Anderson etc etc chewed off a little more fat than they should - without Jobs Apple would be in the dumpster of history right now and we'd all be using Micro sh&t XP ( yeah you think Vista would be out if OSX had not transpired - who would they have copied then ?? what competition would they have - why even bother making a new OS????).

I'm sure a LOT of ordinary folks made a lot of money out of Apple Shares and Job's vision over the last decade. A few milliion quid went astray - so what - they company is turning billions over.

Just stop a moment and try and remember that, and I don't understate this to lightly, that the future of mankind is tied to these handful of visionary tech companies and the handful of incredibles that run them and we'd better be careful that if we burn these people down that it may take 10, 20, 50 or 100 years before the likes of them appear to replace them.

This witch hunt is like trying to jail Alexander Bell for making a 'few more' dimes out of HIS 'telephone idea' than was previously considered.

Steve Jobs practically invented the modern world for crying out loud - so he got a little 'extra' doing it. Big Deal!!.

Just be thankful he's even doing this - he could just as easily be sat on a desert island drinking tequila's giving the modern world the 'bird.

I say - forget this nonsense. Mac's are great, SJ IS GREAT ( only a fool would try to argue against that) and history will show that like all great figures in history they are at the end of the day ordinary human people JUST TRYING TO GET A JOB DONE in the face of all kinds of mediocre crap!.

I ,for one, are amazingly grateful to Jobs and Apple and even to a degree Microsoft and Bill Gates - These people have enhanced our lives immensely!.

We could all still be timesharing an IBM on a green screen or worse picking wheat from the fields with our bare hands in some peasant communist low-tech nightmare...

:)

[BenRoethig]

I see two scenarios here.

1. Anderson is trying to save his butt by shifting the blame to Steve Jobs.

2. Anderson had overwhelming evidence against, but was promised a light sentence if he provided evidence against Jobs that they couldn't get on their own.

[hagjohn]

I see two scenarios here.

1. Anderson is trying to save his butt by shifting the blame to Steve Jobs.

2. Anderson had overwhelming evidence against, but was promised a light sentence if he provided evidence against Jobs that they couldn't get on their own.

Do you believe that Steve Jobs didn't know about the backdating? Is it really shifting the blame if they all knew about it?

[crap freakboy]

Whos this Jobs guy youre all on about?

[California]

Anderson took the blame legally and is paying a huge fine.

Why he's lashing out at Jobs here? To make himself look good.

[Digital Skunk]

Whos this Jobs guy youre all on about?

Exactly... this aint the Jobs we know... the one that's working on 13" MacBook Pros with backlit keyboards and dedicated graphics memory for WWDC. That Steve Jobs is working to hard on the future of computing to bother with this SEC and Anderson finger pointing crap. :D

[ClimbingTheLog]

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:

http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml

Jobs 1.0 is the person who ran the company into the ground.

He left at the height of the first Macintosh revolution. Get your dates straight. Unless you feel that sticking with the Apple ][ was the right course of action for mid-80's Apple.

She should be disbarred as well, and that is exactly what will happen if the SEC wins the case against her.

Good, maybe that'll give corporate lawyers some motivation, if not spine. They need to use their license responsibly.

I would think that as the CFO he would have access to the board and the board records. As the CFO it was his responsability to ensure that he had the correct authority in writting before acting on it.

Right, he's an Officer, not an accountant.

Fun times ahead. But Fred's just screwed himself over in that statement in my book. As if he wasn't screwed enough already....

Agreed, he's now known as Fred "The Squealer" Anderson up and down the Valley. I expect this means that Jobs basically fired him, and he's trying to be vindictive, but this doesn't bode well for his future opportunities.

But, people here often assume that The Steve is involved in every other tiny little detail of the company - it stretches the imagination to think that he wasn't paying attention to hundreds of millions of dollars of stock options.

Those people are crazy. No man can be involved with corporate takeovers, product design, do Keynotes, fight cancer, work on the new campus and its iTube (subterranean shuttle), run Pixar, and take care of the topiaries. He may or may not have been involved with the backdating, but the mystique about Steve Jobs is just that.

[mccldwll]

"I would think that as the CFO he would have access to the board and the board records. As the CFO it was his responsability to ensure that he had the correct authority in writting before acting on it."


Correct. It was Anderson's job to get this stuff right. Who knows exactly what Anderson told SJ and what SJ understood Anderson was telling him. This was a gray area back when happening, as evidenced by all the companies now under investigation. Accountants were pushing things. In all liklihood, the board did approve (if informally, maybe a series of phone calls to all members) a grant at lowest price, and Anderson was in charge of getting it to work. SJ didn't just create these things himself. They were granted (even if correct procedure not followed). And it also was Anderson's responsibility to get them right, and the annual accounting right. For him to shift responsibility to Jobs, he had better have somethiing signed by SJ explaining the situation, and that he was aware of the problems and implications.

[mklos]

If Jobs is indicted and removed as CEO of Apple, and Apple falls by the wayside into the corporation graveyard, how long would a web site like MacRumors survive? A year? Less?

Have you guys got your resumes polished up yet?:eek:

Apple can survive without Steve Jobs today. They are in a very good position currently with some very good people surrounding them. Apple just needs to keep going in the direction its currently going in and keep focused. Thats what happened in the early/mid 90's, they lost focus and paid dearly for it. Steve came back and got them back on track, focusing on the things they should have been doing in the first place.

Also, Steve isn't the only person who thinks up all of these new great ideas, its the people behind the scenes. Steve is just really good at getting what he wants which is something a lot of other people aren't good at. He's also a damn good salesman!

[TheBobcat]

I guess the key thing here is that the SEC didn't feel the need at any point to do anything more than question Steve. So they couldn't find a THING to do to him. If they even had an iota against Steve, they would have pursued it so some bureaucrat could become famous and they could make an example of someone else just like they did of Martha Stewart.

The testimony of a convicted criminal isn't quite enough to build a case against Jobs, since obviously there has been nothing to indicate any involvement on his part. Albeit, he could have access to some records, but you would think that anything he could get now as he's been out of the company for a while is something the SEC already would have had access to.

The bottom line is that the SEC needs to utilize its discretion to go after the right people. What, how many people from Enron are still on the loose, where a ton of people lost their pensions? The administration can give loads of money in all these suspicious contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we're more interested in putting away Martha Stewart for getting 40 grand in insider trading. I'm not saying that we shouldn't ignore their crimes, but I think we should make an efficient use of our tax dollars instead of trying to make examples of people.

[Gasu E.]

I'm so sick of you stupid, warped drones. You worship a piece of plastic and silicon as if it's the monolith from 2001 and refuse to believe anything your sainted Steve Jobs does could ever be wrong. If this charge is true, Steve Jobs ought to be thrown in jail. You children who have never owned a share of stock or owned underwater options (I still have 1000 of them from IBM issued in 1999 ... anyone want 1000 IBM shares at 148? Didn't think so.) you obviously don't understand the pure greedy criminality of this act. Anyone guilty of options backdating ought to be dragged through the streets for his pathetic, borderless greed.

You know nothing... the issue under discussion was immaterial to Apple's stock performance. Jobs being removed, on the other hand, would destroy enormous amounts of stockholder value.

I own over $500K of stock (no, not specifically Apple) and have an MBA from a top 10 business school.

You, on the other hand, know so little you should apply for a job at the SEC. Perhaps this is why you bought tech stock options at the height of the Internet bubble. Talk about ignorant, greedy lambs being led to slaughter!

[IJ Reilly]

He left at the height of the first Macintosh revolution. Get your dates straight. Unless you feel that sticking with the Apple ][ was the right course of action for mid-80's Apple.

No, not at all. Jobs was canned when the company was deeply mired in crisis, with the success of the Macintosh very much in doubt. The Mac had gotten off to a good start in 1984, but sales fell off sharply in 1985. Jobs 1.0 was notorious for his lack of focus and discipline (as was Apple a whole), and nobody knew what to do next. In fact Jobs hired John Scully in 1985 because he recognized that Apple was in need of "adult supervision." Scully did an excellent job of righting the corporate ship -- but one of his obstacles in this task was Steve Jobs, so Scully fired him. One of the big questions everyone had when Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 was whether he'd become more seasoned, to the point where he could run the company effectively. Fortunately for us, he had.

[surferfromuk]

Wow - there are so many 'I could have done it better's' around here...

well here's a wake up call...

Everyone on this board could be a multi-billionaire 30 years from now IF....

they only go help create something incredible and unique and then get it to market, then develop something even more incredible despite everyone saying it can't be done, then maybe get booted out of your own company for having created that incredible thing without I should add a crystal ball, then maybe manage to consolidate your position and 10 years later rise again even more triumphant, only to facilitate a few more incredible things and bring a whole new generation of wonderful things to market...

IF and WHEN you can do all that and not manage to have some lesser talented bean counters/anonymous grey men in a suits try through either incompetence, greed, scheming or just bad luck screw it all up for you THEN you can come onto a public forum and cry about what you think Steve Jobs may or may not be doing...

Until then you should recognize what an incredible man he is and that he is SO FAR removed from a TV celebrity chef and TV homemaker that I can't even believe parallels are being drawn to Stewart....

Steve Jobs is right up there with Henry Ford, Alexander Bell, Alfred Nobel...

Let's be under no mistake about this!!..

[Maccus Aurelius]

Pfffff, if I was in charge of Apple, I'd.....:(

Anyway, I hope he didn't actually do anything, cuz I'm sure his loss, regardless of whether or not the company's secondary heads can keep pumping good ideas, would still have a negative effect on the company, which would be most apparent if a #2 of sorts hosted the keynotes while Jobs sat in a translucent plastic box Magneto style. But if Jobs ate live kittens and snatched the walkers from under old ladies, we can learn to live without him.

[JGowan]

Why would Steve knowingly do something this dishonest?

Steve's been a very, very rich man for a very, very long time. His passion is not the money or we see very little about him these days as he would off sailing the world and being the proverbial Bruce Wayne playboy. No, he loves computers and electronics and making the very best of them.

He's the 132nd richest man in the world, a billionaire worth almost $6 BILLION ($5.7B). He's a "millionaire" 5,700 times over. There's no way he would want to fudge for a few more million on the pile. There's simply no need.

---

FORBES.com's Billionaire List (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/10/07billionaires_The-Worlds-Billionaires_NameHTML_print.html)

[hagjohn]

Civil charges filed against 2 ex-Apple officers (http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/biztech/04/24/apple.stock.ap/index.html)
POSTED: 3:30 a.m. EDT, April 25, 2007

SAN JOSE, California (AP) -- The Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil charges Tuesday against two former Apple Inc. officers over their alleged roles in backdating stock options. The agency immediately announced a settlement with one of them.

Former Chief Financial Officer Fred Anderson, 62, has agreed to pay about $3.5 million in fines and penalties to settle the case, the SEC said.

The case against former general counsel Nancy Heinen, 50, will proceed. Her attorneys have vowed to fight the charges.

The commission accused Heinen of participating in fraudulent backdating and altering company records to conceal the fraud. The charges were in connection with two large options grants that caused the company to underreport its expenses by nearly $40 million, the SEC said.

Read full article (http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/biztech/04/24/apple.stock.ap/index.html)

[SillyKary]

Why would Steve knowingly do something this dishonest?

Steve's been a very, very rich man for a very, very long time. ... There's no way he would want to fudge for a few more million on the pile. Wealth makes greedy. A lot of really rich men are also really greedy, always want more. Few are as generous as Gates, giving away a lot of their wealth (and even he became a big philanthropist only after he ruthlessly made a lot more money than he could ever possibly spend on his family alone).

$3.5m to a billionaire is like $350 to someone who is worth $100,000. Imagine, if all your assets combined - house, stocks, savings - you own a very reasonable $100k, and you had a chance to pick up another $350, would you do it?

I don't know about SJ's attitude towards money, I'm just saying it's very possible that even a billionaire does very much "fudge for a few more million".

[WhiteShadow]

let's face it anderson is a jerk trying to take jobs down with him. own up to your ill-gotten gains.

[Rocketman]

Wealth makes greedy. A lot of really rich men are also really greedy, always want more. Few are as generous as Gates, giving away a lot of their wealth (and even he became a big philanthropist only after he ruthlessly made a lot more money than he could ever possibly spend on his family alone).

Gates was not "generous". He used a tax dodge known as a foundation into which he transferred that portion of his estate which would immediately become subject to double taxation on his death. By putting it into the foundation, tax is entirely avoided on those sums forever, and the deduction reduces tax on other portions of his income which is substantial to the degree he diversifies out of appreciated Microsoft stock, his primary asset holding.

The foundation then hires his entire family and friends and pays them salaries and generous benefits, which is taxable income to them. The proceeds from the gain on the foundation are themselves tax-free even if it involves an otherwise taxable investment such as stock or real estate.

The only obligation of the foundation to "serve its stated purpose" is to spend "a portion of the annual proceeds from investments", presumably net of salaries, oerhead, and benefits.

It is a great tool for the ultra rich (>$20m) to preserve the asset they grew and keeping it out of the hands of the IRS. Killing the foundation provision would be pointless as some other tax dodge would be employed otherwise and it would NOT have a "good public purpose". It also might not throw off massive taxable income and benefits paid to employees.

Rocketman

[JGowan]

Wealth makes greedy. A lot of really rich men are also really greedy, always want more. Few are as generous as Gates, giving away a lot of their wealth (and even he became a big philanthropist only after he ruthlessly made a lot more money than he could ever possibly spend on his family alone).

$3.5m to a billionaire is like $350 to someone who is worth $100,000. Imagine, if all your assets combined - house, stocks, savings - you own a very reasonable $100k, and you had a chance to pick up another $350, would you do it?

I don't know about SJ's attitude towards money, I'm just saying it's very possible that even a billionaire does very much "fudge for a few more million".No. Even before I was worth more than the $100K figure you speak of, I wouldn't steal another $350. You say "Wealth makes greedy" (sic) -- I don't think that's true of all people. That's a very big blanket statement you've made that's not always the case. You go on to say "I don't about SJ..." -- well, then -- why not give him the benefit of the doubt? INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, right? He's a known Budhist and I believe he's shown remarkable tenacity with the startup of Apple; getting ousted; forming, growing and selling Next; buying, growing and selling Pixar; forming, growing and beating Cancer; coming back to Apple and developing some amazing stuff in the last 10 years -- again -- worth $5.7B, what would the extra money mean to him.

I read once (I wish I had the link) that Steve is very conscience of buying all of the digital music/movie/tv files that he downloads from iTunes, keeping everything above board. He could have his chioice of 5M songs for free but he pays for everything he listens to because he's not a thief.

[mac jones]

it's not the money, it's hubris.

Maybe he just slipped up and it's coming back to bite him in the apple.



Martha didn't need the cash either.


frankly, this looks not so good. Didn't Martha's broker say the same thing: "If i'm a goin down you is cumin along wid me bitch" -(well, maybe not exactly that way)

time to short Apple stock?

Anyway, maybe Steve can show some of the inmates how to use computers, maybe have little classes. I think Martha taught crafts didn't she?

[JGowan]

it's not the money, it's hubris. Maybe he just slipped up and it's coming back to bite him in the apple.Yeah... let's prosecute Jobs on his so-called arrogance? That makes sense.

Martha didn't need the cash either.Martha is Martha. You are you. I am me. Steve is Steve. Let's be clear here: all Billionaires are not created equal. Player-haters, apparently, are... don't hate.

frankly, this looks not so good. Didn't Martha's broker say the same thing: "If i'm a goin down you is cumin along wid me bitch" -(well, maybe not exactly that way)"He said/He said". Who cares?

time to short Apple stock?Time to grow up.

Anyway, maybe Steve can show some of the inmates how to use computers, maybe have little classes. I think Martha taught crafts didn't she?Uhmmmmm... not funny.

-----

Just did a search for other posts by this guy. One negative newbie ... crawl back under your bridge, troll.

[SillyKary]

No. Even before I was worth more than the $100K figure you speak of, I wouldn't steal another $350..
I'm sure they (=everyone involved in options backdating tricks at various companies that came under scrutiny recently) didn't see it as stealing. They may even have truly believed that approach was fine. If you had the chance to make those $350, say, saving taxes by exploiting a legal gray area, would you?

You say "Wealth makes greedy" (sic) Just curious, something wrong with the spelling (because of the sic)?

I don't think that's true of all people. That's a very big blanket statement you've made that's not always the case.Yes, it's a general statement, which I believe generally is true. Of course not every single rich person is greedy, but many, perhaps most are. Statements like that are not meant to be taken in absolute terms. It's like saying "TV is so boring". Well, guess what, it's not ALWAYS boring, but often enough. If it makes you feel better, insert "often" in my sentence.

why not give him the benefit of the doubt? INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, right?As you noticed, my argument was a general statement showing why I believe it's naive to think "There's no way he would want to fudge for a few more million" simply because he's already rich. I'm not saying Jobs IS or IS NOT guilty, but that he could be. "There's no way" (btw, just as much a blanket statement) ... well, yes, there is. There are many examples of highly acclaimed people, who fell into the greed trap.

And about the "innocent until proven guilty" part, ... You know, I'm sure there are tons of executives who use various questionable means of enriching themselves by skimming shareholders or shirking taxes and never get caught. Innocent? Maybe in a legal sense, but they're still guilty in my book.

He's a known Budhist and I believe he's shown remarkable tenacity with the startup of Apple; getting ousted; forming, growing and selling Next; buying, growing and selling Pixar; forming, growing and beating Cancer; coming back to Apple and developing some amazing stuff in the last 10 years -- again -- worth $5.7B, what would the extra money mean to him. Those are all commendable achievements, but unrelated to whether or not he accepted a compensation package that included questionalble options.

[JGowan]

... If it makes you feel better, insert "often" in my sentence.I was speaking to Mac Jones, not to SillyKary -- you've got two screen names? Well -- ok. The old good-cop-bad-cop approach to Board Posting.

My problem with your whole initial post was your quick support of Anderson in that Jobs is possibly guilty simply because Anderson pointed fingers. The fact actually was that there were both an internal and a governmental investigation with Jobs coming up clean.

Bottomline, as you may know by now, Apple's board supports Jobs and they actually KNOW the guy.

The gut-reaction for a lot of people these days, it seems to me, is the desire to see the powerful fall. The sheer glee and joy it brings for those who have-not to see those who have-a-lot take a tumble just sickens me.

[SillyKary]

I was speaking to Mac Jones, not to SillyKary -- you've got two screen names? Well -- ok. The old good-cop-bad-cop approach to Board Posting.And I was speaking to and quoted only from post #78 where JGowan replied to SillyKary.

My problem with your whole initial post was your quick support of Anderson in that Jobs is possibly guilty simply because Anderson pointed fingers. My post had nothing to do with Anderson, I would've said the same thing without Anderson's press release. It just strikes me as odd that SJ is on the receiving end of a multi-million dollar reward, is the top-boss in his company and known as a control freak - yet claims not to know how these millions really came about.

The fact actually was that there were both an internal and a governmental investigation with Jobs coming up clean. Bottomline, as you may know by now, Apple's board supports Jobs and they actually KNOW the guy. The board also has a very vested interest in keeping SJ out of trouble. As you said, Jobs was "developing some amazing stuff in the last 10 years" and is in many minds the reason for Apple's success. Do you think the board would just happily reveal anything that could possibly get Jobs prosecuted? And the government? Well the government only knows what insiders like the board tell them or what they can glean from documents the insiders provide. And if the insiders all sit thight, well ...

The gut-reaction for a lot of people these days, it seems to me, is the desire to see the powerful fall. The sheer glee and joy it brings for those who have-not to see those who have-a-lot take a tumble just sickens me. Don't get me wrong, I've been an Apple fan for a LONG time, am happy about the firm's recent success and am not really keen to see an Apple without SJ at the helm again. I'd definitely not be full of "sheer glee and joy" to see him fall. At the same time, I'm also not naive enough to insist that SJ is a saint and staunchly deny that he could possibly have been involved in any wrongdoing.

BTW, with your repeated "Jobs is a $5.7 billionaire" argument, keep in mind that Forbes list is from 2007. The incident happend in January 2001. The iPod, the cornerstone of Apple's meteoric rise, didn't even exist yet. SJ was worth $1.4b in Jan 2001 (http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/54/2001/LIR.jhtml?passListId=54&passYear=2001&passListType=Person&uniqueId=HEDB&datatype=Person), his Apple stock was worth $38 (yes, that's thirtyeight dollars for two shares) and his older options were worthless. Another $3.5 in comp may have been even the more tempting.

[Peace]

All will be revealed when Nancy Heinen goes to court because she claims to have email saying Job's told her to do it.

[princealfie]

Okay here are some quotes about him:

Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability.

Tell me, Mr. Anderson, what good is a phone call when you are unable to speak?

Mr. Anderson! Surprised to see me?

We are here because of you Mr. Anderson. To take from you what you have tried to take from us.

Mr. Anderson! Welcome back, we missed you.

Therefore Mr. Anderson is very very famous and wanted. Boooo...

[mac jones]

ok, I don't think anyone here wants to see Steve get busted unless they are a troll. I for one, have a Macbook Pro with Apple Care , 4 ipods, and so much more apple crap I don' thave all day to list it all.

'Normally' I wouldn't care much one way or the other but Steve hitting the rock pile would be awful.

But this thing looks bad, and the fact that the Board has affirmed support isn't going to stop them from firing him if it comes to that.

Usually, where there's smoke there's fire.

As a note, I was a bit suprised by this iPhone product and how Steve was so gung-ho about something that looks like a odd niche item. I couldn't help but wonder that he may be distracted and losing his touch. Something like this can reverberate on and on.

[Cult Follower]

Why would he do somehting like that, i really don't lik this guy.