I'll put it to you this way. If Apple continues to deny that Jobs has health issues and he dies of a health related issue while he is CEO, there will be a class action against Apple and as a shareholder myself since the day it went public I will be a part of it. I've already called Apple and demanded a statement as a shareholder. They know who I am, but I got stonewalled. I don't like this one bit.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Apples CEO Heath is Rapidly Declining
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
- Status
Master Blaster
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,442
FUD or shens: you pick
radiatinglines
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 247
life's a piece of shit, when you look at it. life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true. you'll see it's all a show; keep 'em laughing as you go. just remember that the last laugh is on you!
obviouslytom
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 29,735
But he will run on OS X and 99% of medications will not work on him
Parja
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2002
- Messages
- 12,670
Might want to just go ahead and get over yourself.
Shotglass01
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 1,992
Don't worry buddy. I'm sure Hector Ruiz would be happy to take over as CEO. It's not like he has anything better to do right now.
CrimsonKnight13
Lord Stabington of [H]ard|Fortress
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 8,439
Gizmodo seems to be just another gadget gossip site...
-=Antimatter=-
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 3,343
It's a gadget industry news blog just like Engadget. This story happens to be filed under "rumor."
Get over what? I'd like to know if my investment and those who run my investment and that includes Jobs and his health are in top shape and if there are issues I'd like to know about it so I can make informed decisions. It's my right as a shareholder to have the complete view of what my company is doing with my money and my time. If you owned stock of a company and they were hiding information of any kind that could either send a stock tumbling or make it go higher wouldn't you want to know? Tell me again what I need to get over?
BombermanX
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2004
- Messages
- 617
Aww Heath Ledger 
Dear God no. I'd rather have (heaven forbid) a dead Steve Jobs (Weekend at Bernie's style) running Apple than having Ruiz anywhere near it.
And i just got that tune out of my head last week..thanks.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
Sad news to hear the guy isn't doing so well. I don't wish the guy to be sick and/or die, whatever the case is.
Every time a rumor surfaces about Job's having died or admitted to a hospital or something, their stock takes a beating that day.
AT A RUMOR.
If you don't call that hinged on one man's health, I don't know what you call it.
You've got to be kidding me.
Every time a rumor surfaces about Job's having died or admitted to a hospital or something, their stock takes a beating that day.
AT A RUMOR.
If you don't call that hinged on one man's health, I don't know what you call it.
It also clearly demonstrates that Jobs can care less about the folks invested in the company. In any usual publically traded corporation, the stockholders are kept in the know about things like this. How Apple gets away with it is beyond me.
I'm sure that not eating junk was the cause of his cancer.
You idi... dudes need to check your sarcasm meter. It's probably broken.
I wonder how long the Apple swat team took to get some counter-news/rumor in the mainstream after this rumor was published.
You can't fight cancer. If you call getting chemo'ed to and throwing up anything you eat to last 4 more years fighting, then i hope god is with you.
This sounds like ignorance from someone who doesn't own any stock or knows what a stock is. If I was the poster you are referring to, I would be demanding the same thing. I sold off all my AAPL stock when it jumped back to 180 after chilling at 147 for 2 weeks before completely tanking with the rest of the market.
Umm, yeah... that was kind of my point. Apple isn't going to come crashing down if Jobs leaves, just like Microsoft didn't crumble when Gates left. There will be a few bumps and the over sensitive tech analysts will freak out, but at the end of the day Apple will be fine.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
Uh, no, it wasn't. I'm taking the completely opposite opinion, that Apple WILL come crashing down when Jobs leaves. It might struggle along there for awhile like it did back when Microsoft bailed them out, but it won't prosper without the guy.
Even though I hate Apple (and Jobs') tactics, you've got to admit they can market a product quite well.
Gates cares about his company. He went through what, a two-year transitional period to step down? Steve Jobs is apparently grasping the helm of the ship until he finally gets forcefully removed by natural causes. There's nothing good about that for the shareholders, and I am shocked Apple hasn't been sued over his health before this. Right now, they are just delaying the inevitable unless he is really just fine after all.
Well then please sell your stock, the rest of us smart, level headed people will pick it up for you at a bargain price. Apple isn't going anywhere but up from here, Jobs or no Jobs.
The difference is that Gates wasn't Microsoft in the same manor that Jobs is Apple. or vise versa Apple isn't Jobs. However you want to look at it.
Gates created and ran Microsoft but it wasn't like he himself was solely responsible for every single idea that came out of Microsoft. At Apple it is all up to Jobs. Wether or not this is 100% true is another thing, but in most people's eyes Jobs created everything and he is the company.
Also look at when Jobs left before, Apple started to go down. It took Jobs coming back to start to rebuild the company.
For Apple to continue on its current path it would need to keep making new ideas, how well can they do that without Jobs around? How much does he actually contribute to what they make? How much of the ideas for what direction to go and what to make come from him and how much comes from others?
On top of that I could swear I read before how Jobs keeps a lot of his stuff (work related information) secret with nobody else allowed to see it. So if he dies how easy it is going to be for another person to just step in? From what I have heard about how he runs the company I don't think that another CEO could just step in tommorrow and take over and be at the same place the Jobs is now.
Dude, he's the CEO. He's not the personality you hired to market your product. If he's too sick to do his job, then he should take a leave of absence, be fired, or retire. He'll have done nothing wrong legally. If he was something like a celebrity model, sports personality, etc. that was hired specifically for physical appearance in promoting your product and he does not inform you of any illnesses that may impact his ability to help sell your products then it might be a different case as far as knowing whether or not he is too sick to work.
In both cases you have a right to know whether he is too sick to work. In the second case you might even win a suite. I can pretty much guarantee you will lose if you try to sue Apple or Steve Jobs into revealing whether he is sick. That is private information and we have privacy laws. The only time you should even be concerned is if he's too sick to work. This doesn't seem to be the case yet though his physical appearance is troubling.
Lots of thoughts:
- The last time Jobs left the company it was against a hostile board. The team he has in place now, the COO that whipped Apple into the tightest running ship in the PC industry even over Dell and HP (1-2 week inventory, tops), the industry leading engineering/industrial design team, the OS team he brought over from NEXT (the company he ran along with Pixar while he was away from Apple), these are all people and teams that were installed by him. The Apple that Jobs would be leaving today if he died is radically different from the one he was kicked out of in the mid-80s. Its one that reflects his values and standards for shipping products. Again, this would be very different from when he left in the 80s.
- If he dies, yes, Apple won't have him as a figurehead, but the notion that the products are all something that he creates himself is ludicrous. There are a lot of very smart software and hardware engineers working at Apple, and its not like they're suddenly going to stop producing great products.
- If Jobs truly is dying and Apple is willfully denying this despite direct questions, there will be action taken by shareholders and the SEC, no question. Also, the stock will take a beating the day he dies. For some it will be a longterm loss, for others it will be an amazing buying opportunity.
- Thinking longterm, with $25 billion in cash, excellent profit margins, a customer base that continues to grow even in the worst economic climate in decades, the company continues to flourish. Even if the stock gets hammered, there is only so low it can be taken given how strong the company is now and how strong its future outlook continues to be.
- Finally, for the last two years, Jobs hasn't even been the focus of the keynotes, he's more of an emcee. Whereas before he would stand there presenting for two hours, now he does the introduction, but then lets his project leads and VPs do the main demonstrations. Its a big difference and one that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned here yet. Tim Cook and Jonathan Ive did most of the talking during the unveiling of the new Macbook line. Its obvious to me that talk of succession is in the cards.
Then there's the fact that stock options to the top VPs were granted near the bottom during the market crash two months ago. These are to be exercised no sooner than 2011. These are people in for the long haul, so the core people that both run the company, work on the operating systems, and do the physical engineering of the products aren't going anywhere.
Unless Apple suddenly starts to go from producing really great to really bad products as a result of Jobs dying, the quality of their shouldn't change substantially. Given the talent that they have working from the top down at Apple, I don't put the odds on this being high, but we'll see.
- The last time Jobs left the company it was against a hostile board. The team he has in place now, the COO that whipped Apple into the tightest running ship in the PC industry even over Dell and HP (1-2 week inventory, tops), the industry leading engineering/industrial design team, the OS team he brought over from NEXT (the company he ran along with Pixar while he was away from Apple), these are all people and teams that were installed by him. The Apple that Jobs would be leaving today if he died is radically different from the one he was kicked out of in the mid-80s. Its one that reflects his values and standards for shipping products. Again, this would be very different from when he left in the 80s.
- If he dies, yes, Apple won't have him as a figurehead, but the notion that the products are all something that he creates himself is ludicrous. There are a lot of very smart software and hardware engineers working at Apple, and its not like they're suddenly going to stop producing great products.
- If Jobs truly is dying and Apple is willfully denying this despite direct questions, there will be action taken by shareholders and the SEC, no question. Also, the stock will take a beating the day he dies. For some it will be a longterm loss, for others it will be an amazing buying opportunity.
- Thinking longterm, with $25 billion in cash, excellent profit margins, a customer base that continues to grow even in the worst economic climate in decades, the company continues to flourish. Even if the stock gets hammered, there is only so low it can be taken given how strong the company is now and how strong its future outlook continues to be.
- Finally, for the last two years, Jobs hasn't even been the focus of the keynotes, he's more of an emcee. Whereas before he would stand there presenting for two hours, now he does the introduction, but then lets his project leads and VPs do the main demonstrations. Its a big difference and one that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned here yet. Tim Cook and Jonathan Ive did most of the talking during the unveiling of the new Macbook line. Its obvious to me that talk of succession is in the cards.
Then there's the fact that stock options to the top VPs were granted near the bottom during the market crash two months ago. These are to be exercised no sooner than 2011. These are people in for the long haul, so the core people that both run the company, work on the operating systems, and do the physical engineering of the products aren't going anywhere.
Unless Apple suddenly starts to go from producing really great to really bad products as a result of Jobs dying, the quality of their shouldn't change substantially. Given the talent that they have working from the top down at Apple, I don't put the odds on this being high, but we'll see.
Here's an article on the last product launch, and how it was more about team leads than Jobs himself: http://gizmodo.com/5063281/is-steve-jobs-preparing-his-farewell
Same thing happened with the iPhone presentation last summer, Jobs was barely present.
Same thing happened with the iPhone presentation last summer, Jobs was barely present.
No offense, but you really need to understand business and how the market works before you pipe off like this. If you are in business, then you are clearly ignorant or unaware of how things work in the real world, not this concoction you just made up.
The CEO of any company is the captain of the ship. He is the face of the company, he is the head of the company, he is the rudder by which a company is steered. What he does or doesn't do affects a company and it's performance, good or bad. Steve Jobs has taken it upon himself to be the face of Apple, to promote their products, to introduce new product, to be the driver behind the entire iLife brand. He has the final say so and if you don't think he does, then you are deluding yourself.
Your last statement is a total mischaracterization of what I said earlier. I said if he is sick and he dies as a the CEO of Apple while in that capacity and the company didn't divulge that information to it's shareholders under and NDA or a secrecy clause, and that stock tanks because of it, you bet your little dangling peanut there will be a class-action.
Suing someone to reveal their state of health is another matter completely. Are you willing to bet my money and other shareholders money in that assurance that if a health revealing lawsuit were actually brought to action that it would be unwinnable? Don't make stupid statements like that, it only fuels the perception that you don't know what you are talking about. He is a CEO of a publicly traded company, he has an obligation to the shareholders as that CEO to reveal anything he knows that would hinder or keep him from acting in the capacity of CEO. If he doesn't do that, then he is getting shitty advice from his council general or they are hedging their bets that his health status as a CEO of a publicly traded company is sacrosanct. I'd like him to be honest with me and the rest of the shareholders.
This is just ignorance at this point. I'm not even going to bother addressing what you've said at this point. You've already descended into the world of silly.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
I'm sure you'd also say that how they spend their money and how much they make is entirely secret too?
It's part of being a public company. Rules and regulations. You do give up some certain "rights" you once had.
If you purposefully withhold information that could financially impart your shareholders in a big way (like your CEO's health steadily declining), you're held responsible.
If Jobs dies while he's the CEO, or even steps down before time when he knew prior of health issues... Apple's going to lose a big suit.
Methadras, I stand by my comments. Your comments however show you as a borderline lunatic. My comments reflect my opinions and I'm not going to change them. Your comments show a little bit of ranting as well as some borderline personal attacks. You know nothing of my business acumen nor anything about me. I can say that business wise, my family and I have been very successful and my father can retire on his various investments. I'll just leave it at that.
Steve Jobs is CEO. Steve Jobs is not a hired celebrity to market a product. CEO stands for Chief EXECUTIVE Officer the last time I checked. So long as he's not too sick to do his job, which is to be a top level manager (fancy business concepts 101), how sick he is is none of your business.
If Apple reveals details about Steve Jobs' health without his consent they would be liable because of privacy laws. So long as Apple's board and those in charge are of the opinion that his health is not going to affect his job performance, they do not legally need to reveal crap to you or me. This is fact. Not something I made up.
Steve Jobs is CEO. Steve Jobs is not a hired celebrity to market a product. CEO stands for Chief EXECUTIVE Officer the last time I checked. So long as he's not too sick to do his job, which is to be a top level manager (fancy business concepts 101), how sick he is is none of your business.
If Apple reveals details about Steve Jobs' health without his consent they would be liable because of privacy laws. So long as Apple's board and those in charge are of the opinion that his health is not going to affect his job performance, they do not legally need to reveal crap to you or me. This is fact. Not something I made up.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
He's both, how can you not understand that?
You're saying Apple almost fell into the ground when Jobs left, and is now back strong, because of his MANAGEMENT capabilities?
I seriously don't know whether to pinch myself in disbelief or just laugh about it.
You seriously aren't disagreeing with me or Methadras here.
I'd agree with your above statement. What I am trying to argue, is if Jobs isn't healthy enough to attend MacWorld (which he is KNOWN FOR), he must be pretty seriously in decline... They'd be in hot water for not disclosing that fact.
IF he is fine why doesn't Apple come out and dispel the rumors so they stop effecting their stock? I don't know of any other company who would keep so quiet about such important matters. Its been clearly shown that the subject of Job's health effects Apple's stocks. The shareholders have a right to know if he is having health problems because those health problem WILL negatively effect the companies stock. If he isn't then Apple and Jobs should have no problem saying so.
TechieSooner
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,601
I forgot to add... One of the primary responsibilities of a board of directors is to protect their shareholders interests, assets, and ensure they receive a good ROI.
With other companies, that means disclosing issues with the CEO's health. Why Apple thinks they are immune to that, I have no idea, but they WILL BE HELD accountable if something happens.
The company and Jobs himself have come out and repeatedly said that his health is fine. Hell, it was even a slide in their last two product launches.
All that said, if Apple are willfully lying to the press about it, there will be hell to pay from shareholder lawsuits and the SEC.
The problem is that Apple always plays everything close to the vest; its why it is such an easy stock to manipulate. They don't comment on stories or rumors one way or the other. If people want to move Apple, or more importantly the S&P and Nasdaq stock indexes, both of which Apple is a major component, feed a rumor to a major blog on Apple. "The new iPhone won't launch on time", "Jobs is dead", these have all been fed to blogs and news outlets in the past and have all been shown to be false.
Why even do it? It moves the stock, and in sympathy, the stock indexes (where the real money is made).
All you need to make money in the market is a big move, and this is one of the simpler ways to do it if you have the right connections. Open a short position in AAPL, feed a story, cover your short positions as people sell, go long again, it makes perfect sense. Hedge funds do it all the time, and people have been charged by the SEC for doing exactly that specifically with AAPL.
Again, if Apple are lying about Jobs' health, there will be hell to pay from shareholders and the SEC. That said, be aware that there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye.
I see. So this is the game you want to play when you have no basis in facts to bolster your claims? You haven't shown any and now you resort to calling me a borderline lunatic? Really? How do you do know that? Just like how can you guarantee losing a lawsuit to force Apple to reveal Mr. Jobs' health, hmmm?
Opinions only matter when they are rooted in fact, not speculative conjecture or baseless accusations of knowledge that someone claims to have? You can say the moon is made of cheese and stand by that opinion, but it wouldn't be based in facts now would it? You can stand by whatever opinions you want to, but if they aren't based on facts, they are pointlessly made and are just nothing than keyboard flapping.
Buy some Apple stock, then come back in this thread and hold the same opinion and then maybe you can stand on the same footing I do.
You've proven that you lack the basic understandings of the realities of at least being a shareholder and the responsibilities that a board has to it's shareholder, aka owners, of the company they are investing in. If this is the attitude you have as purveyor of business, then I'd hate to think what an uninformed decision on your part looks like.
As far as your opinions about me ranting, I would have to assess that, again, you simply do not understand a thing about what a rant is or looks like. Try to peddle your armchair psychoanalysis elsewhere please.
This is a completely useless and meaningless statement to make. A non-sequitor that has about as much relevance as your vaunted opinion or whatever business acumen you claim to have. I really don't care how successful you or your daddy are. It just doesn't prove how astute you are when it comes to this topic.
This is just a plain stupid statement to make. I won't even bother to respond to this nonsense. You simply have no idea of what you are talking about.
It's apparent that you aren't savvy to something called disclosure. Do you honestly believe that HIPPA regulations fall against full disclosure? While there is no 'legal' requirement to disclose the health of a CEO, you just aren't astute enough to understand the legal theory behind disclosure of health related issues that lead to death vs. the outcome of shareholder liabilities, but considering that Jobs had Pancreatic Cancer back in '03 this would be considered a serious issue to fully disclose whether or not he has a serious to life threatening health concern. If he had something like diabetes and he managed it properly, then I would say that wouldn't be an issue, but since he's already had cancer, I would say that his health vs. shareholder liabilities vs. full disclosure from the board is a big deal.
The shareholders decide with their wallets whether they want to support that company, if Jobs has another cancer issue, I want to know about it so I can make an informed decision about what to do. Most likely I'd say that I would be fairly sympathetic to him and see how he fairs in his diagnosis and overall prognosis, but since Apple is shutting out shareholders to disclose this information to us, then I need to make my own conclusions. If they are going to circle the wagons, then I need to start assessing my loyalty to this company as an original shareholder. Aside from shareholders like me asking Apple to disclose, some analysts are asking Apple for disclosure or they are going to stop recommending Apple as a long-term investment. If you don't think that hurts stock valuations, then you may be more clueless than I thought.
The buck stops with Jobs. He makes all the final decisions on how Apple is represented. He is in complete tune with what is happening within the company. I've met with him several times, I know what kind of person he is and I know the level of decision making he has within the company. You just don't know what you are talking about.
QFT, very well said.
0ptional
Don't Trust Your Friends with Your Decanter
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2003
- Messages
- 5,593
I still think health issues should be a private matter, and if he wants it that way, let it be, you invested in the company, not him.
He IS Apple. Nothing goes on in Apple without Job's approval. He runs every aspect of it. He signs off on everything. all decisions go through him. So yeah his health is VERY important.
+1 I agree wholeheartedly.
Steve jobs had no hand in creating the initial hardware concept of the iPod from what I've read... definitely was involved with creating the massive demand for it, by successfully selling it to the masses through a combination of innovative features, ease of use and slick marketing.
I really doubt anybody else could have done the same... if Bill Gates was the head of Apple when he was given the concept of the iPod, he would have doomed it to be as successful as the Zune is now and Apple would be an also-ran in the digtial music industry rather than the dominant player. ;-O
I don't have to like all the hype that Jobs feeds to the masses and have them eat it up like manna from heaven, but I can definitely appreciate the talent that he has that allows him to do it is *EXTREMELY* rare and that chances are virtually NIL that Apple can find a replacement for Steve Jobs that will even come close.
Apple is going to take a massive stock price hit if *anything* moves Jobs away from his daily Apple duties, be it health related or just wanting to retire and do other stuff. The stock market is fickle like that, especially with a company's stock price that has appreciated as quickly as Apple has in the last few years and has had only one real salesperson.
Like him or not, there is NO REPLACEMENT for Steve Jobs that can prevent Apple's stock from tanking in the short term when he leaves, whenever that is.
- Status