Apple's Macworld Exit Due to Politics Not Health Issues?

[MacRumors]

Apple announced today that this year would be Apple's last year participating in Macworld Expo and that Phil Schiller, not Steve Jobs, would deliver the final keynote address. Understandably, speculation has been directed towards health concerns about Steve Jobs as the reason for the withdrawal. Jobs underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer but has been said to been cancer free as recently as July.

CNBC reports that Steve Jobs' decision was one motivated "more by politics than his pancreas".

Sources tell me that if Jobs for some reason was unable to perform any of his responsibilities as CEO because of health reasons, which would include the Macworld keynote, I should "rest assured that the board would let me know."

Instead, the author believes that Apple has been trying to separate itself from Macworld for years with the use of "special events" to introduce new products a few times a year. This is said to give Apple complete control over its own message.

Meanwhile, Macworld Expo organizer IDG is putting on a strong face saying that they are committed to Macworld 2010 and "look forward to many successful years of Macworld to come."

Article Link: Apple's Macworld Exit Due to Politics Not Health Issues?

[irmongoose]

Actually, I found it hard to believe that it was for any reason other than politics. Here's to hoping that Apple opens another slot for a yearly "special media event". Steve-notes aren't dead yet, folks!


irmongoose

[lazyrighteye]

The "control" angle makes a lot of sense.

[Eduardo1971]

I find it hard to believe Macworld going-on after 2010-especially with the majors pulling out of the trade show.

It is only a matter of time...

[SpaceMagic]

Let's not assume the worst! Perhaps he's just ready to retire or just distancing himself from Apple. It is kind of weird that the stock price reacts to news of his health, perhaps the board has told him to distance himself a little.

[iOrlando]

hopefully this thread will contain more rational thoughts than the previous ones where people are thinking steve is retiring tomorrow and macbooks wont be made anymore... seriously... come on people..

[winterspan]

God, can't the press get over the cancer thing? The most common form of pancreatic cancer is normally incredibly deadly, with a ~5% 5-year survival rate, but Jobs had a very rare type that, while not completely benign, is very easy to treat. Any health problems from that experience would most likely be from complications of the whipple surgery, not a re-occurrence of cancer.

On the other hand, even if Apple is distancing itself from MacWorld and transitioning to a system of ad-hoc special events, why would Jobs not want to give the last Macworld keynote???

[mac-er]

Steve or no Steve...the only negative is the loss of the 'magic' of the Keynotes because of the atmosphere. The press and attendees of the 'town halls' just don't produce the same 'zealotry' atmosphere of the keynotes

[Sky Blue]

I find this pretty believable.

[iOrlando]

Originally Posted by winterspan

God, can't the press get over the cancer thing? The most common form of pancreatic cancer is normally incredibly deadly, with a ~5% 5-year survival rate, but Jobs had a very rare type that, while not completely benign, is very easy to treat. Any health problems from that experience would most likely be from complications of the whipple surgery, not a re-occurrence of cancer.

On the other hand, even if Apple is distancing itself from MacWorld and transitioning to a system of ad-hoc special events, why would Jobs not want to give the last Macworld keynote???

what would steve talk about? genius playlists for another hour?

[Sky Blue]

Originally Posted by winterspan

why would Jobs not want to give the last Macworld keynote???

because the announcements they have seem like they'll be pretty small.

[DeaconGraves]

Originally Posted by mac-er

Steve or no Steve...the only negative is the loss of the 'magic' of the Keynotes because of the atmosphere. The press and attendees of the 'town halls' just don't produce the same 'zealotry' atmosphere of the keynotes

There's still WWDC, and the iPod events have been fairly large in the past.

Though I'm sure Apple sees your point, and I wouldn't doubt certain events becoming a bit more accessible to the public in the future. This is more of the issue that Apple doesn't want to be under the banner of Macworld anymore, not that they dislike the "zealotry atmosphere"

[alexbates]

If Jobs is cured from cancer by June, I hope he will decide to do the Keynote next January. Even though it's not going to be at Macworld, I'm sure Apple will find somewhere else to have it.

[zap2]

I agree this "want control" makes sense...why keep a nice laptop design back because MWSF is soon, but you wanna get it in before winter shopping season?


And if they have a nice new iPod being worked on,why not keep it a secret until its really ready to wow people?

Pulling out over Job's health doesn't make sense...i mean clearly they are doing it this year, with out him,sure they might have trouble meeting his standard, but they'll have to do it sometime

[rick3000]

This does seem to make sense, now Apple won't be pressed to release new products or updates on a fixed schedule every January, they can do it when they're ready. Maybe this will help them avoid future reliability issues like they've had recently with MobileMe and the first release of Leopard.

Apple should have just come out and said this, instead of leaving people guessing. Because obviously most people picked wrong, thinking he was dying or something. (Myself included.)

[jaw04005]

Originally Posted by SpaceMagic

It is kind of weird that the stock price reacts to news of his health, perhaps the board has told him to distance himself a little.

The board?

This is not your traditional corporate board with seats from different segments of shareholders (union representatives, investment group representatives, etc).

This is a select group of carefully chosen individuals who have "real jobs" and serve as figureheads and advisers only.

They serve at the pleasure of Steve Jobs (and on paper—shareholders), and I highly doubt any of them would have the nerve to tell Jobs anything.

http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/bod.html

[likemyorbs]

Apple is like a controlling, abusive husband. But we stay with him cuz "we love him"

[dewser35]

The control thing absolutely makes sense! Why distract away from what Apple is trying to accomplish?

And in regards to his health... I think the perception that he has so much control over the success of Apple will absolutely be influenced by news of his health and the subsequent stock price fluctuations. It would be wise for the board to try to get more of a face for the company. Though the reality is that Steve IS Apple. All of these products are out of HIS brain. The vision he has in tandem with the attention to detail is extremely rare. There are leaders at many companies that make awful decisions which end up crippling their companies everyday and they will continue to do so until the end of time. Regardless of who else is put in place either now or after he steps down will never match his accomplishments.

[kjs862]

I can understand why they would stop going to macworld, but why wouldn't steve do the last keynote?

[jaw04005]

Originally Posted by kjs862

I can understand why they would stop going to macworld, but why wouldn't steve do the last keynote?

This quote from Apple Representative Steve Dowling to CNET may explain why.

"Phil is giving the keynote because this will be Apple's last year at the show," Dowling said. "It doesn't make sense for us to make a major investment in a trade show we will no longer be attending."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10...CmoreStories.0

It sure sounds like they're sending Schiller to sort of "finish it off."

[pytter]

This is clearly the start of a transition away from Steve as the main spokesperson for Apple product launches. My guess is that the board are clearly worried about the reliance on Steve as the only face of Apple - healthy or not. I think we are going to be seeing more of Ives, Schiller and others and less and less of Steve. Apple is just too big to rely on one person and the board knows it.

P

[Compile 'em all]

Originally Posted by kjs862

I can understand why they would stop going to macworld, but why wouldn't steve do the last keynote?

nothing major to announce.

[Chupa Chupa]

Sigh. The end of an era. Last person to leave Moscone Center on Jan 9 please turn off the lights. MacWorld is dead.

I think this is a penny-wise decision on Apple's part. Sure Apple can give a special event at any time and people will notice, but what about all the s/w and perif developers that supported the Mac. MW was their stage. I wonder if they'll go over to CES.

Originally Posted by kjs862

I can understand why they would stop going to macworld, but why wouldn't steve do the last keynote?

Probably because Apple doesn't have any tricks in its bags and the keynote is just going to be a Snow Leopard bake off and after 10 years, Steve is sick of doing them. Plus I'm sure it's meant to make everyone more comfortable with other execs at Apple besides Steve so when Steve does leave there won't be a major selloff in Apple stock.

[twoodcc]

well i sure hope that steve jobs is healthy, and that he doesn't plan on stepping down from apple anytime soon

[ubercool]

Originally Posted by jaw04005

This quote from Apple Representative Steve Dowling to CNET may explain why.

"Phil is giving the keynote because this will be Apple's last year at the show," Dowling said. "It doesn't make sense for us to make a major investment in a trade show we will no longer be attending."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10...CmoreStories.0

It sure sounds like they're sending Schiller to sort of "finish it off."

No it doesn't. Macworld is one of the biggest computer exhibitions on earth. Apple cannot possibly buy "facetime" with 60,000-plus people cheaper than it can via this event. I'm sure that if they did a cost-per-conversion analysis, they would know that Macworld delivers sales in spades and then some.

My sense is that this is simply a bargaining chip to get IDG to cave on certain parameters. I cannot for the life of me imagine why you want to preclude demo time to that many people unless there's another reason that permeates this decision.

I may sound cruel, but it's high time that Jobs moves on.