Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Apple

NYT Reports Steve Jobs' Exoneration 129

Posted by Zonk
from the happy-days-for-stevo dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NYT Reports Steve Jobs' Exoneration

Comments Filter:
  • ...what the!? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Penguinisto (415985) on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:35PM (#17402408) Journal
    ""Apple is in a much more difficult position than other companies in the backdating morass, because a significant portion of its market valuation is based on Steve Jobs staying at his job," he said."

    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).

    /P

  • Nice to see. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by sgt.greywar (1039430) * on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:35PM (#17402416) Homepage Journal
    Apple is no Enron. Sometimes they really didn't do it.
  • Re:...what the!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer (103300) * on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:44PM (#17402498)
    Well it is not that Jobs is irreplaceable but Jobs is heart of the company. The reason for Apples success lately was because the systems follows Jobs vision of a computer. Microsoft and Dell tend to compromise what all their customers say they want and put it in. Apple just put in what Jobs like. Hence being able to Switch OS's and Platforms without missing a beat. Democracy doesn't always come up with the best solution just one that everyone can deal with. Apple either you love it or you hate it. Apple does listen to your advice but just because a lot of people want that feature it doesn't mean they will put it in.
  • by CDPatten (907182) on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:48PM (#17402530) Homepage
    Apple may have cleared him. but the SEC hasn't. I suspect Apple is only clearing him because of the speculation, rumors, and falling stock.

    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."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:52PM (#17402568)
    Couldn't he have still done something illegal but not benefited financially?
  • by Voltar (973532) on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:52PM (#17402574)
    An internal investigation by the Clinton Justice Department found Algore did nothing wrong when he accepted gobs of soft money from the Bhuddist Monks at a "funraiser" due to "No Controlling Legal Authority" An Inconvenient Truth, Al?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29, 2006 @03:59PM (#17402644)
    Because that's all this is: Apple saying Apple didn't screw up. Whoop-dee-fucking-doo.

    All we need now is for Jobs to write a book called "If I played games with stock options".
  • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Friday December 29, 2006 @04:04PM (#17402716) Homepage Journal
    The article still doesn't indicate any wrongdoing on the part of Jobs. It does suggest that apple fucked up someplace. It also kind of suggests that Jobs was involved, since he was the recipient of the options... But it doesn't say so.
  • by One Louder (595430) on Friday December 29, 2006 @04:07PM (#17402740)
    ...he profited $7.5 million in stock options...
    How exactly did he profit from these options when he gave them back without exercising them?
  • Re:...what the!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Friday December 29, 2006 @04:13PM (#17402818) Homepage

    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)

    by locokamil (850008) on Friday December 29, 2006 @04:19PM (#17402886) Homepage
    Judging by the amount of chaos, unhappiness and general unpleasantness in the world, I submit that Hell is actually pretty efficient...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 29, 2006 @05:06PM (#17403506)
    The grandparent's comment has context whereas yours is fingerpointing.
  • by argent (18001) <peter@NOsPam.slashdot.2006.taronga.com> on Friday December 29, 2006 @05:10PM (#17403550) Homepage Journal
    OK, let's get this straight.

    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.
  • by 7Prime (871679) on Friday December 29, 2006 @08:30PM (#17405112) Homepage Journal
    Now, I can not attest to knowing anything about this ordeal, but it has been interesting to follow how the forum is handling it. I've noted that most of the posts on this forum largely fall into two catagories: flippint remarks, usually involving common cliches and tidbits from geek pop culture thrown in for good measure; and then fairly serious posts by people who actually READ THE ARTICLE, most of which exhonerate Mr. Jobs. Now, I expected quite a few posts that would attempt to clear him and settle the unrest it has caused... but I expected more in opposition by people who actually have something worthwhile to say.
  • Re:...what the!? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Reverberant (303566) on Friday December 29, 2006 @10:40PM (#17405936) Homepage

    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).

  • by Omestes (471991) <omestes @ g m a il.com> on Saturday December 30, 2006 @02:54AM (#17407244) Homepage Journal
    Okay... he was implicated by an in house audit, AND reported it. Later (after reporting it) it they find that he is innocent. If this was corporate wrong doing, then why would they report it in the first place, AND THEN do responsible action and admit a mistake, and try to fix it?

    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)

    by adsl (595429) on Saturday December 30, 2006 @12:42PM (#17409974)
    The 7.5mm Stock award was "given" to Steve Jobs in October 2001, hence details would have been disclosed re Senior Execs remuneration in documents suppled for that yeas AGM. Now we are being told that nobody noticed that there had been no board meeting to award that amount of Shares to the CEO. The CEO didn't notice his award wasn't ratifies by a Board meeting. The CFO didn't notice The Gen Counsel didn't notice The Head of HR didn't notice The internal Audit Dept didn't notice The external Auditors in their review didn't notice. The Board members didn't notice Only 2 people appear to have left Apple. And yet nonone else in the above list noticed this "small" item?

You don't have to know how the computer works, just how to work the computer.

Working...