MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

I think shareholders would prefer him to stay. Imagine what the share price would do if he left.

Recompense to shareholders?
Maybe next weeks launch of iPod Phone will be enough.

I'm a shareholder, and I demand that we fire Steve (who has generated literally billions of shareholder value) and gets paid $1 per year, and hire an high-profile celebrity CEO (bring Jack Welch back from retirement maybe?) with a salary of $100 million per year, plus options and a big golden parachute to pay him out when he's fired for poor performance.

That will really teach Steve a lesson and leave us shareholders much better off in the long run!!!

Could it not be argued that the recompense to the shareholders is the fact that he's in charge and has made them a load of money? Of course, they may have made more without all this but I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Mr. Duprey writes.....

"But as investors, why should we be so protective of Steve Jobs"


But.....it is noted a the bottom: "Fool contributor Rich Duprey does not own any of the stocks mentioned in this article. "

So I wonder where he is getting all of this so called honest indignation about Steve Jobs, when he cannot even write a short article without lying.

I agree with no giving away shareholders money....


As on that has a vested interest, I vote to let this one go.
As a shareholder I am making money as Apple grows.
Plus, over 400 percent gain I made has covered any lost money.

Happy New Year!!!!

What damage has been done to shareholders?
It wasn't too many years ago that people were saying that Apple would not survive.
More misinformed FUD

Steve is not the only head honcho who was involved in backdating options. If all those involved in backdating were kicked out American business would be facing a major crisis. Steve did not profit from the backdating. Steve is safe.

Steve will give shareholders a choice.

Shareholders will overwhelmingly choose Steve over the jealous assholes that want his head on a platter.

Shock news: Shareholders cut off their own noses in protest.


I don't think so.

No doubt Steve was wrong.
No doubt shareholders have gained during his tenure.
No doubt Steve should stay!

This guy clearly went to the "dictionary of loaded words" for this piece (scandal, fallout, a practice that gave away shareholder money to management and other employees, intimately involved, knowingly participated in fraudulent accounting maneuvers, but absolved him of complicity in the crime), and because of this, this shows some kind of CLEAR anti-Apple slant.

This guy is a hack and is really just trying to make a bigger deal out of this than it is now. Apple filed their ammended documents, which should make the SEC happy. Apple's investigation showed that Jobs did nothing really wrong, and honestly, Apple is just one of many, many companies involved in this because the rules were vague to begin with.

It's not in the best interest of the shareholders to can someone like Jobs unless crimes were clearly committed. Yeah, ok, $85 million has been restated. As an Apple shareholder, I'd gladly lose that rather than the BILLION plus $$$ that would be lost if hacks like this guy got Jobs removed as CEO.

Jobs owes a recompense to shareholders?

Is not the 600+% increase in the value of AAPL stock over the last 5 years not enough?!? Rich Duprey needs to get over himself already.

Let shareholders decide what to do with Jobs...

1) Let him stay.

2) take his private jet away for a week.

3) take back his $1 salary.

4) launch one more thing next week

Oh, what the hell!!!!



I Feel like backdating some Apple shares to good ol Steve, just to say damn good job at making us money!

Plus the amount of problems on my Apple verses my PC- well, hell- none on the Apple and the PC is slugging it out to survive.

Good enough for me to Pardon!

another transparent microsoft cow regurgitating astroturf ...

As it has been pointed out many,many,many times Steve Jobs did not benefit from any of the back dating. Therefore I see no reason for him to be forced out especially when he is leading the market in inovative products which no one else can seem to produce. It would be a very negative effect on the economy if Jobs were forced out.

The Motley Fool is often a mouthpiece for hedge funds; read its commentary at your own risk. The main point that needs emphasizing: it's not illegal to backdate options to award in-the-money-options. The possible illegality comes in during the accounting for them and the disclosures made to shareholders and the SEC.

Check out the following article for a sane discussion of the matter:

http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=445&mn=16964&pt=msg&mid=1120490

I went to jail for something that was actually done by my stockbroker. Why? because people don't like me. Steve Jobs is infinately more likeable, so it will be interesting to see what happens to him.

I love Steve and think he should remain, however, just because a CEO does not personally gain from something does not mean it was not unethical or illegal. SJ and the other executives (former) need to reach into their pockets and pay a hefty fine. CEO's need to know this cannot and should not be done. Make an example of SJ by making him pay financially, not but ruining a great American company.

The Motley Fool is a farce.

They are currently assisting with the FUD campaign that is being waged against Apple.

FWIW, AAPL is up an order of magnitude x2 since I purchased mine. What sort of "recompense" exactly is it that I should expect?

Morons..

I always thought that in order to be paid damages you had to actually had some in the first place.

Who would be the next CEO if Jobs is history?

Stockowners question n.1: "How will the CEO switch affect the companys future?"

Dell isn't actually a money making machine, while Apple is easy money.

While I'm sure that the post under the Martha Stewart moniker was meant as tongue in cheek, it is certainly not accurate. She did not go to jail for something her stockbroker did. She was convicted of lying to investigators about her involvement in insider trading. As a former stockbroker and president of the NYSE board of governors, they figured she knew what she was doing wrong. Her stockbroker also went to prison and was fined for lying and obstruction. Neither went to prison for improper sales of securities.

Steve's own arrogance, and that of his company, has come to haunt him. He brought this on himself and now he is suffering the consequences. So be it.

Is not the 600+% increase in the value of AAPL stock over the last 5 years not enough?!?

It's not about "enough"

Yes, Jobs has made many of us a lot of money. That doesn't make it okay to cheat investors out of some of their money just because they already made a lot. It's unethical and devious.

I truly hope Jobs isn't culpable in any way.

Back-dating isn't illegal. Did anyone have a Tech job in the 90s? Back then, they called Back-dating "Fair Market Value".

Which meant every quarter (3 months) you would get stock options that were 15% below the lowest price of that stock during that period. Which in essence , tries to grantee you that your option would have some value from the start. They did this to compete with higher paying jobs.


And the only things that make Back-dating or "Fair Market Value" illegal is in how you account for it.

And the last time I check, Steve Jobs was not CFO. Never held that title...doesn't seem like he wants the title.


So I can see that Fred's in trouble...still don't see how Steve would be.

There are evidently some Apple shareholders who do not realize that Steve Jobs' "recompense to shareholders" is that he continues to run the company! Without Steve Jobs, Apple Computer would be the also-ran it was before his return and the shareholders would be busy looking for other investments. Idiots!

I am a shareholder and in my opinion we should give Steve a nice round Billion as a thanks for turning the AAPL to a Rocket and the Mac to that fantastic machine it is today. He would deserve to get another Billion because he has kicked some Dell and Micro$oft asses. It has been pure joy!

Survive? That's pretty harsh. Murder or capital punishment is a bit much, dont'cha think?

Jobs should be taken out to the wood shed, flogged with a hickory stick, then made to roll naked in pig slop, forced to eat cow chips, then thrown into a haystack full of fleas and ticks. THEN he should be driven down Wall Street strapped to the grill of an SUV at fifty mph through rush hour traffic. Naked, of course. THEN he should be hogtied to a waterwheel...

Excuse me; I need to use the restroom...

First, Duprey is a "contributor", just a regular joe like you and me.

Second, he seems to think backdating is illegal, which it is not. Third he seems to think knowledge of backdating is illegal, which it is not. And, fourth, he seems to think giving out options to reward employees is somehow illegal, which it is not.

It's the inaccurate accounting of these backdated options that is illegal. If Steve is responsible for the inaccurate accounting, then he'd have something.

Let the Shareholders vote on if he stays or goes. That seems fair. I vote he stays.

And any shareholder stupid enough to vote him out should be prepared to lose a lot of money.

I have worked for companies that have an employee purchase plan for shares. The employee picks the amount of buy in taken from each paycheck..... At the end of the quarter, the employees funds are used for stock dated at the stocks lowest price during that quarter.

Back dating is a very common and NOT illegal practice. With all the hype and media attention, it may soon become illegal, but right now its not.

There are dozens if not hundreds of companies in the same situation as Apple. Why do we never hear about many if any of those?

Oh yeah, Apple is on top with the iPod, any reason or excuse to take 'em down... And that damn Steve Jobs, who does he think he is, saving the music industries sorry ass and then not rolling over and playing dead by surrendering all iPod profits to the RIAA.. The Bastard

Should Bill Gates be allows to keep the computing world in the Dark Ages?

As the point was made by several posters already, but it bears repeating: Backdating itself is not an illegal practice. All employee stock purchases plans use backdating to allow rank-and-file employees to buy stock each quarter. So Steve could have approved the backdating thinking the rules would be adhered to with regard to reporting.

That's where backdating becomes tricky. If you backdate, you need to report it clearly. This is where Apple slipped up, and it was the responsibility of the CFO at the time to make sure all stock grants that were backdated were reported properly. Apple discovered it was not, and they just recorded a measly $84 million charge to account for all the expenses related to the issue for the last 7 years. Furthermore, the investigation showed that Steve did not purposely or knowingly try to hide the backdating, which by itself is perfect legal.

In that time, Apple has added something like $50 billion in market capital under Steve's helm. An $84 million expense as opposed to a $50 billion gain in the stock market. Stock holders need to be recompensed? Who does this writer think he is, a stand-up comedian?

If Jobs is guilty, then he should be punished.

If he is innocent, then nothing happens, of course.

Point is: We don't know what happened yet.

I'm a shareholder too, but I can't say it any better than "critic" waaaaay up at the top!

And as a shareholder I can't possibly express how much of a warm embrace I feel from that SEC and those trial lawyers (and bloggers) looking out for me!

What seems to be escaping everyone here is that these are NOT stock grants but stock option grants.

They are a promise to sell a set number of shares of common stock at a specific price to whoever holds the option when it is exercised.

That means the holder BUYS the stock and pays cash for it which is treated as additional paid in capital for the company. The company essentially exchanges a piece of paper that says John Doe now owns X number of Y issued Shares of Company Z in exchange for CASH. John Doe MUST BUY THE SHARES promised in the option at the price stated... and that money becomes the joint property of all the shareholders through the corporation they all jointly own.

They are not gifts of money or even assets from the company treasury... Before the options are issued, the stock shares that those options MIGHT BUY are merely already authorized but unissued shares that could be sold, given away, or encumbered as collateral of a promissory note. Since the option is a promise to sell the stock at a specific price, it is essentially as that last that the unissued shares act.

In the Jobs case, the 7.5 million shares @ ~$17 would mean that Steve would have to dig into his cash holdings and fork over $127,500,000.00 to Apple.... money which Apple could use to develop a new product, buy raw materials, etc.,... before he could even begin to profit.

I calculated the impact on the outstanding common stock shares of the $20 Million "hit" that Apple took in "non-cash" accounting entries (note that... its all on paper) and it works out to less than 3¢ per share... in one quarter.

Let's see. Apple has gone from $17.00 to $163 (not adjusted for the split) since October of 2001. If I bought Apple stock on October 19, 2001, should I be upset that an accounting kerfluffle about the backdating of unexercised options has cost me 2.35 cents per share when the efforts of the man who was granted those cancelled options resulted in me making $146 per share? No WAY!

That 2.35 cents is lost or gained in the general background noise of the market in trading.

"Back dating is a very common and NOT illegal practice. With all the hype and media attention, it may soon become illegal, but right now its not."

Issuing options (legally) to people which are not at the market price on the day of issue is exceedingly uncommon. This is because of specific tax ramifications of issuing in the money vs at the money. Issuing in the money options is NOT illegal, if the compensation expense is properly recorded. Pretending those options were issued on another day is.

Creating a false paper trail to say that options were issued on an earlier date and therefore worth less money (which is what most people would call "backdating") always is.

The analogy goers like this:

You have an employee named Steve, he steals from you, but he does a good job and brings in a lot of business. Do you 1) Fire Steve on principal and call the cops because you don't employ thieves, no matter how much firing him might hurt the company. 2) Hope you understand just how much Steve is stealing from you and be prepared to turn a blind eye provided Steve is still making you money. 3) Have your boys take Steve for a drive in the woods. 4) Give Steve a bonus and tell him to steal more.

Most people here seem to lean towards option 2) or 4)

He answers his own question in the very next sentence: “But as investors, why should we be so protective of Steve Jobs if he was engaged in a practice that gave away shareholder money to management and other employees? Yes, it's recognized that Jobs has done a magnificent job of reviving a company that had long looked moribund.”

If someone takes a dollar bill out of my wallet, then sticks a $100 bill in it, all before i ever notice, am i going to call the police?

Idiot.

Steve Jobs could murder your mother and then screw your cat and you'd still all be fine with him wouldn't you? You should listen to yourselves. If this was Gates you'd be howling for the death penalty before you heard a word of evidence.

Enjoy your return rants, I won't be checking back to read them but I'm sure they'll be super.

I think he should give back what he profitted from those options. Oh yeah, that's $0. OK then, we should cut his annual salary in half. Oh yeah, that's 50 cents.

Mr. Duprey - It's the shareholders who decide, not journalists and the popular media. Shareholders have benefitted tremendously from Steve Jobs, except for the "dumb" shareholders who panic and sell after reading "Apple is doomed" stories (like yours). Shareholders are not likely to fire Steve Jobs, and he will most likely stay CEO of Apple until HE decides to do something else. In fact, this "scandal" will probably lengthen Steve jobs's stay with Apple to allow time for him to "clean up" his image. Steve Jobs may genuinely love Apple, but there is no way he was planning to be Apple CEO for the rest of his working career.