NYT Reports Steve Jobs' Exoneration 129
heyitsgogi writes "The New York Times is reporting that Apple has cleared Steve Jobs of any wrongdoing. From the article: 'In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Apple said that while its investigation revealed that the company's stock option procedures did not include sufficient safeguards to prevent manipulation, Mr. Jobs did not benefit financially from any questionable stock awards.' As a result of the internal investigation, Apple said it would record $84 million in expenses related to the options awards."
...what the!? (Score:1, Insightful)
Ah, and I suppose that if Bill Gates ever left Microsoft, Microsoft's stock would be doing just fine? (Note that there was a recent story from CNet news in which Gates went out of his way to say that he wasn't quite leaving MSFT yet...)
Geez - it's not as if Steve Jobs is God or anything (zealots' assertions to the contrary, of course. IMHO the only reason Jobs' return to Apple was hailed so highly in the first place was because the people he replaced were as incompetent as Hell).
Nice to see. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:...what the!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple with no Jobs? (Score:2, Insightful)
The internet is buzzing [marketwatch.com] withspeculation that Steve Jobs may step down over reports that he profited $7.5 million in stock options by falsifying an executive board meeting. The financial times has a good overview of the unfolding story [ft.com].
From the Article:
"Steve Jobs, chief executive of Apple Computer, was handed 7.5m stock options in 2001 without the required authorization from the company's board of directors, according to people familiar with the matter.
Records that purported to show a full board meeting had taken place to approve Mr Jobs' remuneration, as required by Apple's procedures, were later falsified. These are now among the pieces of evidence being weighed by the Securities and Exchange Commission as it decides whether to pursue a case against the company or any individuals over the affair, according to these people."
"...not benefit financially" (Score:1, Insightful)
Clinton and Algore trained Jobs well... (Score:1, Insightful)
You think Enron would have reported itself? (Score:1, Insightful)
All we need now is for Jobs to write a book called "If I played games with stock options".
Re:Apple with no Jobs? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Apple with no Jobs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:...what the!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Really?
Steve Jobs pulled the company back from extinction. During his reign we've seen the rise of OS X, the iMac phenomenon, the iPod juggernaut, iTunes, and other great software. The fact is the design and implementation of nearly all of Apple's products (especially the big ones) owe at least something to Jobs tweaking. Don't forget his massive performances every Macworld (less than 2 weeks, yea!).
The loss of Steve Jobs would be devastating to the company's stock, if not the company it's self.
In fact, not too long after they announced Steve Job's cancer and successful surgery last year there was an opinion piece in Forbes that made a very strong case that they were wrong not to tell the stockholders about it until after it was fixed because he was such an important part of the company that his health really mattered, compared to the financial results if the CEO of Bank of America got cancer. BoA has other capable people and could survive.
True or false, Apple is basically perceived by a great many people to be an extension of Steve of sorts. Without him there, it's not the same Apple.
Re:...what the!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Al Gore is on Apple's BOD (Score:1, Insightful)
Let's get this straight. (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple does an internal investigation, finds a problem, reports itself, and you're comparing this with Enron [lehenbauer.com] because they also say Steve Jobs didn't benefit from it?
I guess someone's activated an even more powerful reality distortion field than Steve's.
Analysis of the forum... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:...what the!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Jobs is not poor, yet he does very little as a philanthropist short of giving Apple computer discounts to schools to get more market share.
We've been through this before... Jobs may not have made any public announcements about his philanthropy, but that doesn't mean that he's not donating time and/or money to worthy causes. In other words, the only people who know how much (or how little) Jobs gives away is Jobs himself and his accountant.
I'm not trying to excuse any lack of philanthropy - if Jobs is in fact not "giving back" then that is indeed disappointing. But you and I don't know for sure what he's doing with his money (unless you happen to be his accountant).
Re:"some wrongdoing" != "all wrongdoing" (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, corporations can do evil things, and DO evil things. But that does not make everything evil, mistakes still happen, misdirected allegations still happen, just like in real life. Corporations are not intrinsically bad, and their officers are not necessarily corrupt. For every Enron, there is a million not-Enron's. Just because the media makes a big deal of something, does not mean its pervasive. And just because you think all corporations are evil, does not make them so. It is possible to be a good capitalist, and responsible, in fact I'm guessing its the status quo.
And no, I'm not the biggest fan of blatant capitalism, my history will show that. And no, I'm not an Apple fanboy, Apple is just another OS/Platform, and not worthy of a ideological base. Yes, I am using a Mac to type this, but I also have a laptop running Linux and box with XP.
AGM for year 2001. (Score:2, Insightful)