Comments on: Comment: Former Apple Dream Team torn asunder by Anderson revelations

By: ozvr jmycnfr

ozvr jmycnfr — Sun, 13 May 2007 10:37:06 +0000

zujcdke esmz xfvqrln pwusg ehkqlzvxs enuopglyx amsrkuo

By: dfjhepg

dfjhepg — Fri, 11 May 2007 07:47:35 +0000

Best Flowers for You or your girlfriend! Flowers flower tucci

By: Kenny

Kenny — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 08:34:37 +0000

@jbelkin
You’re right, I don’t believe there’s been a suggestion of anything illegal having occurred – although the Attorney General’s office is investigating some aspects. The key was whether SEC rules had been breached and whether the backdated options had been properly accounted for.

The fact that Apple had to restate its earnings suggests they weren’t properly accounted for originally.

As for pretending the board met. It’s a moot point whether the pretence was that the board met or merely that someone was instructed to retrospectively alter the minutes to make it look like they agreed to something which wasn’t in the original minutes.

By: jbelkin

jbelkin — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:50:45 +0000

The other thing to note in the discussion is it’s not illegal to backdate options and at that time, not even considered unethical – it is illegal to secretly backdate options but since tis was being discussed with the board AND they were discussing moving dates around, it wasn’t exactly a hidden deal. Now it is illegal to pretend the board met or as with other execs where they sat in on the board meeting and granted to himself but it’s not the case here. Yes, you can say it’s unethical or just not proper but they were openly discussing moving dates to benefit Steve – again, a normal course of business then in Silicon Valley to reset options because options at that time weere not meaured against earnings, it was essentually a “free” ride.

By: Kenny

Kenny — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:07:44 +0000

You’re right, in a sense. The job of the SEC is to protect shareholders and shareholders would be worse off in the long run if Jobs went. However, the SEC also has rules to be upheld and if these rules are broken, it has to act.

In this case, there was no evidence that Jobs any rules so there was no case to answer. If he had, it would have been a very interesting philosophical debate.

By: Bill Balmer

Bill Balmer — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:43:45 +0000

Don’t forget the whole idea of this investigation is to protect the shareholders. If Jobs was gone it would devastate Apple and the shareholders would immediately loose maybe thirty billion dollars. With proper accounting this will cost shareholders a fraction of one percent of the Jobs loss. Even if a criminal investigation took place the crime is in the hands of those charged already so all those Windows drones who hate Apple will just have to swallow hard and get over it.