SEC To Investigate Apple's Disclosures Regarding Jobs' Health?

[charlituna]

They may have been requested to do so by a large number of shareholders.

Or, it may just be a routine thing.

(If it's the former, I don't know if that may be a harbinger of a class action lawsuit...)

easy.

they know that Apple didn't do anything wrong because they are only obligated to report when the CEO can't do his/her job and/or takes a leave. they don't even have to say why. it is perfectly legit to report "Jobs will be taking a six week leave of absence from the day to day handling operations for personal reasons. Overseeing such actions during said time will be Tim Cook,COO. Jobs will remain in contact with the company etc"

but so many rumors went around and so many complaints that too many folks are sure that Apple knew from day one that Jobs cancer was never cured, he's gone crazy blah blah. So they are griping to the SEC.

Now the SEC could tell them to shut up and start up rumors that Jobs paid them off. Or they could agree to look into it, find that nothing wrong was done, that due to the extreme nature of Jobs condition things literally can change in a day and there was no lying and so on. Most peeps will then shut up about it, satisfied that someone did something.

 

[charlituna]

Steve Job's health isn't like the health of any other employee at Apple though, simply because he is the face of the company.

only to the major geeks.

to the general consumers he could keel over tomorrow and as long as the fun toys keep coming who would notice.

but if that sweet "I'm a Mac" boy were to die. well that would be hell to pay.

Has this ever happened with any other CEO?

i do believe that this might be the first time that a company CEO tried to get in good with the public by putting a human face on the company and being an active spokesperson, to the point of turning himself into a Hollywood esque celebrity and thus allowing same said public to believe they have a right to every detail of his life.

in other news, the SEC just released an update, saying that they discovered in fact that this whole cancer thing is a fraud and Steve isn't really on a leave of absence to recover but in fact is in Los Angeles, training to be a dancer in the next Brittany Spears music video for her new single "Leave us the F*** alone"

This and other similar comments completely miss the point, which is that Apple tried to pretend that Steve's ability to run the company was not of material interest to investors. Obviously it is.

on the contrary. they are well aware that the investors have an interest in whether he can run the company. which is why there is an SEC rule that if he can't, they have to fess up.

The disagreement is whether his health issues mean that he can't. Consider this. He had surgery for cancer in what 2004, 2005. since then what has he led Apple into achieving. Despite being on his death bed, blah blah.

when there came a point that he had to choose between his health and taking a leave, they announced he was going on a little break and would be out of the office. just as they had to. until then, they didn't have to say anything and wouldn't have if the public had any respect for the man's right to privacy

what I find interesting and would toss back at Mr Pitt is that the drop in stock was not a sudden thing. it has been dropping over about the last year. how many times that it did drop, even a dime, was it because of a new rumor from a source 'near to the issue' or 'familiar with the situation' etc. where is the investigation into that. so long as Mr Jobs wasn't undressing and running naked down the streets, saying he couldn't do his job because he was a bit thin is a stretch, so how it is anyone's business to know what was discovered and when (ps, those eps of House aren't totally pulled out of someone's 'hat', things can happen just like that when dealing with medical issues)

 

[Nuvi]

It's his health. Health is a private issue. It is not the job of the BoD to make statements about his health, even if they knew details.

It's simple. Personal privacy comes first. Reasoned sensible release of information in a responsible manner ONCE AND ONLY ONCE the facts are known is the only way for a company to release this type of information. The SEC will investigate to the point they see the above is true, and then say Apple and Jobs have nothing to answer for.

Jobs isn't Apple. Anyone who has bought shares thinking that is a moron.

Unfortunately you are completely wrong with your arguments here. Steve Jobs is not a private person. He is a public figure, a CEO and the face of a multinational corporation. Therefore his health is not private but public issue as he clearly has exceptional value to the company. It can be argued that loss of Steve Jobs could have severe impact on Apple as replacement of his caliber is hard if not impossible to find. Due to this Steve Jobs health issues effect the fluctuation of AAPL and therefore any information regarding Steve Jobs health that could effect his ability to act as CEO of the company should be made public without any delay.

The question remains, did Apple or Steve Jobs know about the severity of the situation? Did they play it down? When you objectively examine the situation you just can't help but to think the needed information wasn't provided in timely manner. Steve has been suffering from severe weight loss for number of months and only explanation Apple and Steve was giving when it was first noticed was that he had a common cold. Then comes Mac World '09 and information that SJ won't be appearing. Flood gates of speculation open up regarding SJ's health. Apple PR and SJ return with letter of pinning down cause of SJ's weight loss of hormonal imbalance. Then comes a new press release from SJ stating his health problem is considerably more complex. Unfortunately all of the symptoms mentioned perviously are common with cancer patients. The question remains, are Apple Inc. and / or Steve Jobs putting investors at risk? If all the information regarding Steve Jobs ability to lead Apple in the future is not made public then they are just doing that and therefore the health of Steve Jobs is far from being private matter.

 

[Tallest Skil]

but if that sweet "I'm a Mac" boy were to die. well that would be hell to pay.

Just have Jeff Goldblum come back.

 

[badmac78]

To Die or Not To Die . . .

IF investors are wise investors, then they would have done their homework on the other top executives at Apple to understand their abilities to lead to company if something were to happen to Stevey. The assumption that Jobs is the only one that makes the world turn is absurd. Now, can Mr. Job's judgement have been impaired to the point of making a poor business decision, yes. I think the Board of Apple would have had him step down, if they believed that to be the case. Seeing as that the SEC completely missed Bernie Madoff, I have no love for them going after a success story such as Apple. I feel it's more the folks who are speculating against Apple and this "they can't keep it up forever" attitude that is driving them investigate.

 

[kdarling]

To be fair this is not the form of pancreatic cancer that you are thinking of (the kind that kills within months).

No, but it's still a kind that kills over 50% in five years.

 

[Lumeswell]

Unfortunately you are completely wrong with your arguments here. Steve Jobs is not a private person. He is a public figure, a CEO and the face of a multinational corporation. Therefore his health is not private but public issue as he clearly has exceptional value to the company.

And if that is enshrined in law then bring it on, lets have the health of every public figure - business, entertainment, sports etc made public, every 6 months.

If a major sports star is struck down with some ailment then it could have massive effects on the financial position of a club, so shareholders deserve to know.

If a director comes down with something in the middle of directing a multi million dollar blockbuster movie then it could have a massive impact on the financial performance of the studio behind it, so shareholders deserve to know.

If the principle of my kids school gets sick it could throw the school in to turmoil for the rest of the year, and effect my childs learning, so parents have a right to know (tm)!

Seriously this is starting to piss me off - where does it end. People whinging that Jobs was sick and may have impacted the price of their shares. Look at the financial results that have just been announced - do you think he could have done better?

Do you think his actual performance over the last 12 months has had any negative impact on the share price?

I still believe the only thing that has had an adverse effect on the price of shares though this is the press speculation and the wanna be investors who panic at the alter of celebrity and believe the stories written by journalists who have no contact with sources who actually have any real knowledge.

Which has had the bigger impact on the share price lately - Jobs and Apple apparently doing their job and the company delivery new products, or the press speculating about how thin he looks, or why he pulled out of presenting at MacWorld, or what some people think he should have done but didn't. Anything other than speculation.

Before everyone starts complaining that the speculation only happens because they didn't release any info. First up - it is a private health matter, so I don't think there was anything Apple had to release, and secondly, when they did release information all the people behind the speculation go into overdrive with more theories about what has been going on. They are a hiding to nothing, so I don't think there is anything Apple could have done to please everyone on this.

Bring on the SEC investigation. I'm prepared to accept its findings if they are negative and hope people are punished - but are the the share price whingers prepared to accept them if they show nothing wrong?

Now - if you can link his health to the decision to drop FW400 support from MBs and MBPs, then maybe you would have a case ....

 

[michelepri]

Stock investors are among the most disgusting beings that ever existed. And they are the cause of all our economic problems.

 

[Denarius]

Does anyone else think that the idea of the future of this multi-billion pound corporate giant hinging on the health of one man is a tad ridiculous? If that's the way investors think then it's no wonder the global economy is screwed.

 

[pprior]

Stock investors are among the most disgusting beings that ever existed. And they are the cause of all our economic problems.

Wow. We have a winner for the highest stupidity per sylable yet in this thread.

Investors are what drive capitalism, which is what has saved the world from dictators, fascists and communists, all of which seek to enslave the people and NONE of which would have ever created a firm like Apple.

I'm not fond of daytraders, but they're a necessary evil within our system and history shows not a single example of any socialist system even coming close to succeeding. In fact the reason our country is faltering is that we are moving closer and closer to that model, bailing out this and that....

Completely off topic, but man that statement was a humdinger of ignorance.

 

[michelepri]

Wow. We have a winner for the highest stupidity per sylable yet in this thread.

Investors are what drive capitalism, which is what has saved the world from dictators, fascists and communists, all of which seek to enslave the people and NONE of which would have ever created a firm like Apple.

I'm not fond of daytraders, but they're a necessary evil within our system and history shows not a single example of any socialist system even coming close to succeeding. In fact the reason our country is faltering is that we are moving closer and closer to that model, bailing out this and that....

Completely off topic, but man that statement was a humdinger of ignorance.

First of all I NEVER insulted anyone on the macrumor forums. Never. This is obviously a trait you earned from the fascist and nazi dictators you claim to dislike.

Second, I didn't put down capitalism. But I put down the current financial system with emphasis on immediate capital gains for share investors, people who are there today but are somewhere else tomorrow. They consume and leave with no concern for long term planning in any company or economy.

Third, if you study history, you will see that it was financial investors who financed European fascist and nazi dictators from the very start. I don't see how those investors saved the world from nazis when they stared it in the first place, and could never win the war without the help of communist Soviet Union.

Anyway we are moving away from the subject of this thread. The most important thing is that I would never call other people on this forum bad names. I was raised that way, you weren't.

 

[IJ Reilly]

First of all I NEVER insulted anyone on the macrumor forums. Never.

Really? You just called me (Apple stockholder since 1997) one of the most disgusting beings that ever existed.

Of course, as regulars on these boards knows, that's entirely true. But nevertheless, it is an insult.

 

[michelepri]

Really? You just called me (Apple stockholder since 1997) one of the most disgusting beings that ever existed.

Of course, as regulars on these boards knows, that's entirely true. But nevertheless, it is an insult.

In this case I apologize, I didn't mean to be insulting and I have nothing against regular shareholders. My complains are directed to large scale speculators.

 

[IJ Reilly]

In this case I apologize, I didn't mean to be insulting and I have nothing against regular shareholders. My complains are directed to large scale speculators.

If that's what you meant, I agree -- the big speculators can be quite frustrating and disgusting. But they do tend to cancel each other out over the long run.

 

[jbernie]

Does anyone else think that the idea of the future of this multi-billion pound corporate giant hinging on the health of one man is a tad ridiculous? If that's the way investors think then it's no wonder the global economy is screwed.

Pretty much yes, but Apple has setup itself up for this by the focus being only on Steve Jobs and not shared amongst other senior execs., the more we know about the other execs., in that we see them doing the presentations etc the more comfortable the market feels about them and the less worry there is.

Of course, the media isn't immune to this either as they treat every word from Jobs mouth as the word of the lord and can i get me a hallelujah, praise the lord and all that type of rubbish they spew to sell copies/get more eyes watching them.

 

[chewietobbacca]

As others have said, I don't see a problem with the investigation. If there was no wrongdoing, Apple has notihng to worry about.

And people saying it's a private issue..

Again, it was private UNTIL they made a public statement saying he was fine. When they reversed course in a week, it's an issue.

And the reason it's investigated is that CEO's dont just dissappear overnight. Yes, it's very possible something came up in those days between, but given that there's usually a transition period to whoever is next going to be in charge, even if temporarily, things tend to get laid out longer in advance, hence all this speculation.

And anyways, Madoff was making tons of money... does that mean the SEC shouldn't have investigated him earlier? Of course not. If you're a public company, then you still need to play by the rules

 

[atszyman]

As others have said, I don't see a problem with the investigation. If there was no wrongdoing, Apple has notihng to worry about.

And people saying it's a private issue..

Again, it was private UNTIL they made a public statement saying he was fine. When they reversed course in a week, it's an issue.

I see three possible outcomes:

1) Apple knew the truth and tried to soften the blow by releasing a more optimistic release first.

2) Steve knew the truth and for whatever reasons (other than financial gain for himself or friends) tried to spin it differently.

3) Steve didn't know how serious and didn't find out until a follow up appointment the following week.

#1 is definitely not cool, and would deserve punishment. #2 needs the caveat of no financial gain, there are plenty of personal reasons that he might have wanted to keep things quiet, and it's possible that his first release may have been technically correct albeit overly optimistic. #3 seems most likely to me.

I have no problem with the investigation, and believe there will likely be no finding of wrongdoing. Apple execs aren't stupid, and anything done like #1 or #2 above for financial gain or stock price manipulation should have been spotted as illegal or at least very unethical before anything was released to the public and if they did indeed do that then they need to be penalized for it.

 

[pprior]

In this case I apologize, I didn't mean to be insulting and I have nothing against regular shareholders. My complains are directed to large scale speculators.

Well, now that is not at all what you said....

I stand behind the statement that your statement was foolish, I didn't mean any personal insult towards you since I know nothing of you as an individual, but insulting capitalism as a whole struck a nerve with me, as it seems everyone is running towards socialism these days and the inevitable disaster it will bring.

Anyway, my apologies, I should have stated things more clearly against your statement rather than being as personal.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I'd like to think that Apple execs aren't stupid, but they did get caught doing something rather dumb in that bush-league options backdating business. Where big money is concerned, you just don't know if otherwise intelligent people will behave intelligently. Take Bernard Madoff. Please.

 

[michelepri]

If that's what you meant, I agree -- the big speculators can be quite frustrating and disgusting. But they do tend to cancel each other out over the long run.

I just read my original post, and I realized it was very hard. I used words I didn't mean to use and my language was offensive. In this case I was wrong and I need to apologize.

I believe I was angry because at this point I think Steve Jobs needs some peace of mind. I don't know what this investigation will do to help investors, Apple, or customers.

I am not afraid of criticizing Apple and Steve Jobs for program bugs, Iphone selling practices, or lack of updates. But I think Steve Jobs has done his best and we should respect him when he is not well. Apple share holders have made huge profits in the past few years (I don't know about 1997) and should maybe try to forgive and forget this presumed incident. Steve Jobs has been working excellently and full time until he decided to step out with a public announcement. I don't think he needed to do more.

I also believe in free market and the Anglo-American economic model, which has provided us with the best individual development opportunities and produced unmatched creativity. Only in California could Apple start from nothing and provide such innovative solutions.

But I feel that the long time corporate productive model is being replaced by investments seeking short term financial gains. Stock operators with no interest in the companies they invest in. They buy today and sell tomorrow. If the death of a company equals better short term gains, they don't care and are happy.

This system is changing capitalism from a way to optimize output of product and services to a system only focused on short term stock market gains. This system as we know it is only good for banks. It will harm the capitalist model they think they represent.

Once again, I apologize to all Apple shareholders for my previous post, I don't think anything bad about them, I have Apple shares myself. It was an emotional response because I think Steve Jobs deserves to recover in peace.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I just read my original post, and I realized it was very hard. I used words I didn't mean to use and my language was offensive. In this case I was wrong and I need to apologize.

Don't worry, no harm done, especially since you have explained yourself so graciously.

I believe I was angry because at this point I think Steve Jobs needs some peace of mind. I don't know what this investigation will do to help investors, Apple, or customers.

As I have said whenever this subject comes up, I believe Steve and Apple needed to be more forthright about his medical condition from the very start. Instead they tried to keep it under wraps until the situation became unmanageable. This sort of thing always looks bad.

Most of us sincerely hope that Steve will regain his health and will return to his full-time duties at Apple. But that doesn't mean we think he handled the public relations aspects of this issue well at all.

I don't know what good the investigation will do. I hope it finds that no effort was made to hide what was known about Steve's health. If so, that will be the end of it -- for now at least.

 

[jbernie]

Of course, we shouldn't forget the backdating of stock options for Apple employees that went on. Yes, other companies got caught doing it as well, but Apple isn't quite have a squeaky clean image.

The first place to look is going to be in executive/insider share trades going back to Dec 1st at least as that takes it prior to the no Steve @ Macworld announcement i.e first indication something might be going on, then follow on through to a week or so after the announcement. So long as there are no unusual trades, which is narrowed down to about any normal trade that person executes on a consistant basis, ie buy/sell 5000 shares on the same day/date every week/month/year.

Second step is looking at unusual trading habits by particular traders during the same time in case someone else is trading on the knowledge.

I am not expecting anything to be found but Apple might get a polite letter from the SEC reminding them to be cautious with their announcements in the future so no questions can be raised.

 

[chewietobbacca]

Of course, we shouldn't forget the backdating of stock options for Apple employees that went on. Yes, other companies got caught doing it as well, but Apple isn't quite have a squeaky clean image.

The first place to look is going to be in executive/insider share trades going back to Dec 1st at least as that takes it prior to the no Steve @ Macworld announcement i.e first indication something might be going on, then follow on through to a week or so after the announcement. So long as there are no unusual trades, which is narrowed down to about any normal trade that person executes on a consistant basis, ie buy/sell 5000 shares on the same day/date every week/month/year.

Second step is looking at unusual trading habits by particular traders during the same time in case someone else is trading on the knowledge.

I am not expecting anything to be found but Apple might get a polite letter from the SEC reminding them to be cautious with their announcements in the future so no questions can be raised.

Good point. Any insider/executive trading would be a good indicator of intent.

 

[michelepri]

Of course, we shouldn't forget the backdating of stock options for Apple employees that went on. Yes, other companies got caught doing it as well, but Apple isn't quite have a squeaky clean image.

The first place to look is going to be in executive/insider share trades going back to Dec 1st at least as that takes it prior to the no Steve @ Macworld announcement i.e first indication something might be going on, then follow on through to a week or so after the announcement. So long as there are no unusual trades, which is narrowed down to about any normal trade that person executes on a consistant basis, ie buy/sell 5000 shares on the same day/date every week/month/year.

Second step is looking at unusual trading habits by particular traders during the same time in case someone else is trading on the knowledge.

I am not expecting anything to be found but Apple might get a polite letter from the SEC reminding them to be cautious with their announcements in the future so no questions can be raised.

This makes sense but it's another case after all. Let's just hope he gets well

 

[pprior]

I also believe in free market and the Anglo-American economic model, which has provided us with the best individual development opportunities and produced unmatched creativity. Only in California could Apple start from nothing and provide such innovative solutions.

But I feel that the long time corporate productive model is being replaced by investments seeking short term financial gains. Stock operators with no interest in the companies they invest in. They buy today and sell tomorrow. If the death of a company equals better short term gains, they don't care and are happy.

Funny how we start with such apparent disagreement, yet I couldn't agree with you more on these points! Well put.