Jobs Likely to Avoid Criminal Charges in Options Probe

[MacRumors]

Mercury News reports that based on their investigation, there is little evidence to support criminal charges against Steve Jobs for the stock-option backdating investigation that first made headlines in June 2006.

Despite Apple's disclosure that Jobs approved widespread backdating at Apple, there is no evidence he directed the backdating of his own grant or covered it up afterward, based on a review of regulatory filings and interviews with lawyers intimately familiar with the grant who asked not to be identified.

Mercury News provides an excellent summary of the history of the backdating irregularities at Apple. The main issue surrounds an initial meeting on August 29, 2001 where the board had discussed granting Steve Jobs 7.5 million shares, but negotiations continued, delaying the finalization of the stock options. The grant was finalized in December, but the options were backdated to October 2001 with falsified meeting minutes related to the options grant.

The article points out that backdating, itself, is not necessarily illegal, though who was responsible for the falsification of documents remains a point of contention.

 

[DMann]

Great

Awesome news! This happens to be common practice with most corporations. Steve was not interested in reaping benefits from this in the first place. Glad to hear it!

 

[dmw007]

Good news, our beloved leader will not be charged.

 

[iBookG4user]

This is good news, I'm glad that Steve Jobs wasn't involved in this.

 

[PlaceofDis]

good news for apple overall.

 

[steve jr.]

Not out of the woods until the Feds say he's good to go.

 

[mcarnes]

False meeting minutes? Oh brother, all corporations do that.

Talk about a witch hunt.

 

[Doctor Q]

It's not the crime, it's the lack of a cover-up.

 

[0007776]

This is good news, but who was it who voted this as negative???

 

[bearbo]

wait, i'm not getting it.... so backdating is not necessarily illegal?

 

[AeronPrometheus]

This is good news, but who was it who voted this as negative???

You gotta love that one person who trolls Apple forums and uses every opportunity to remind us that he/she believes that Steve Jobs should burn in hell.

Steve Jobs is pure hearted compared to most corporate big wigs.

 

[buddhagoth]

It's not a matter of heart but how the laws are written and whether they were broken or not. The SJ Mercury News is usually pretty good about this kind of info, so it looks like Mr. Jobs is in the clear. Which makes me rather happy for many reasons.

However "mercurial" or whatever Steve Jobs may be, he apparently isn't a criminal or close to being charged as one. These days in Corpo-America, that really is saying something pretty darn amazingly good!

Cordially,
BG

 

[MacinDoc]

wait, i'm not getting it.... so backdating is not necessarily illegal?

Backdating is not illegal, but falsifying documents to cover up backdating is. It's all about the disclosure (at least as far as I understand it, but I'm no expert on the subject).

 

[Stella]

You gotta love that one person who trolls Apple forums and uses every opportunity to remind us that he/she believes that Steve Jobs should burn in hell.

Steve Jobs is pure hearted compared to most corporate big wigs.

SJ acts in the best interests of Apple - just like any CEO would.

This is the problem with any Apple forum ( or ANY forum for that matter ): as soon as someone says anything negative about Apple - even if justified they are classed as a troll.

Get your head out of cloud 9.

Apple would definitely suffer if SJ was to be charged, so this is a good outcome.

 

[winmacguy]

The act of backdating share options is not illegal in itself, it is the process of correctly accounting for the expense to the company of awarding the shares from the time they were dated as being issued. Therefore if it was known at the time that the date that the shares were awarded which didn't match the date that they were expensed to the company on the balance sheet that would make the process illegal.

That is my understanding.

 

[theheadguy]

SJ acts in the best interests of Apple - just like any CEO would.

This is the problem with any Apple forum ( or ANY forum for that matter ): as soon as someone says anything negative about Apple - even if justified they are classed as a troll.

Get your head out of cloud 9.

Apple would definitely suffer if SJ was to be charged, so this is a good outcome.

Well said. It's not the place for a worthy debate.

Good outcome, anyway. It wouldn't do any of us current stockholders any good if he was charged with anything.

 

[alansky]

Steve Jobs is pure hearted compared to most corporate big wigs.

Which is exactly why he's a target. The cynical and corrupt can't stand the comparison—it's not good for business. But the good guys don't always finish last. I can hardly wait to see Steve Jobs vs. Bill Gates at the D Conference on May 30. Could be real blood bath.

 

[Roller]

False meeting minutes? Oh brother, all corporations do that.

Talk about a witch hunt.

Try that excuse if you're audited by the IRS or stopped for speeding. But I agree that lack of prosecution of SJ, if it's confirmed, would be good for Apple.

So now can we move the Leopard release back to June?

 

[Digitalclips]

This is good news, but who was it who voted this as negative???

The same trolls who always do. It never ceases to amaze me that a group of Mac haters have so little to do in their lives that they can spend time posting anti Mac and Steve comments and voting negative to all great Apple news.

Unless of course they are paid to and live in Redmond

False meeting minutes? Oh brother, all corporations do that.

Talk about a witch hunt.

So true! I have heard my accountants in the past comment that 'they forgot this or that' and they'd 'just pop in a back dated meeting where whatever was agreed here or there' and 'not to worry'. I'd always say is that OK? They'd always say 'Of course' as they'd pass a meeting minutes sheet for me and my executives to sign. 'We just had the meeting' they'd laugh. My degrees are not in accounting and that's why I paid the huge fees to accounting firms with large buildings downtown.

I think they must be taught how to do that sort of thing at CPA school in 101 ass covering.

I admit after Enron etc. I would not do this now but back then I honestly never gave it a thought assuming CPAs knew what they were doing.

The TV is full of shows about shady lawyers ... Now I am just waiting for the series about sleazy accountants ... lol

SJ acts in the best interests of Apple - just like any CEO would.

This is the problem with any Apple forum ( or ANY forum for that matter ): as soon as someone says anything negative about Apple - even if justified they are classed as a troll.

Get your head out of cloud 9.

So 10 negative votes can be seen clearly from reading the entire thread count can they? I don't see a negative comment anywhere yet 10 negative votes are shown (at this moment). If ten coherent, intelligent comments were here that 'justified' negative votes then perhaps you might have a point.

As it is can you explain the votes based on the actual threads that are here? I think perhaps it is you with your head up your ... sorry in your cloud.

 

[yzp]

?

good news indeed for the whole !

however, I never ever ear those saying?

is it normal?

 

[freebooter]

Steal an apple, get a criminal record. Steal millions, get...off the hook.

There are principals of justice that are applied vigorously to the commoner that are not applied to the aristocrats, for the "higher good". T'was ever thus.

 

[Digitalclips]

Steal an apple, get a criminal record. Steal millions, get...off the hook.

There are principals of justice that are applied vigorously to the commoner that are not applied to the aristocrats, for the "higher good". T'was ever thus.

While not entirely disagreeing with your somewhat radical, basic premiss in historical terms, please explain where SJ 'stole' anything in this specific case?

 

[trevorlsciact]

The TV is full of shows about shady lawyers ... Now I am just waiting for the series about sleazy accountants ... lol

What television needs is a really good corporate drama. I've always thought this, and it would do so well.

 

[Lone Deranger]

Perhaps it would be an idea for Arn to consider making the vote results public. Open it up to scrutiny. That way, over time, it would give serious forum users a clearer insight as to who they can take seriously and who's "contributions" to the forums to take with a grain of salt.
I'm sure the list of anti-voters would be remarkably consistant.

Anyway, it's good to hear things are looking up on this. The less destractions for Apple the better. Now let's have that Leopard.

The same trolls who always do. It never ceases to amaze me that a group of Mac haters have so little to do in their lives that they can spend time posting anti Mac and Steve comments and voting negative to all great Apple news.

Unless of course they are paid to and live in Redmond

 

[AeronPrometheus]

SJ acts in the best interests of Apple - just like any CEO would.

This is the problem with any Apple forum ( or ANY forum for that matter ): as soon as someone says anything negative about Apple - even if justified they are classed as a troll.

Get your head out of cloud 9.

Apple would definitely suffer if SJ was to be charged, so this is a good outcome.

Anyone who leaves a negative mark but doesn't back it up with an actual debate in the same thread is a troll.

Well said. It's not the place for a worthy debate.

This is a forum... it was built for debates and points of views... hence the word Forum.

If ten coherent, intelligent comments were here that 'justified' negative votes then perhaps you might have a point.

Exactly.