Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

Steve Jobs to Skip Apple Shareholder Meeting

by - source: Tom's Hardware US

Following all the hoopla there was about Jobs not attending Macworld, we’re sure the shareholders and pundits will have a field day with this piece of news. The Apple CEO is not expected the company’s annual shareholder meeting scheduled for this week.

Bloomberg reports that Jobs’ absence from the meeting (which will mark the first time in nearly a decade that he hasn’t been at a shareholder meeting) is likely to highlight the importance of having a succession plan in place for the CEO. That said, we think it’s way more likely Apple is trying to prove to the shareholders that “life goes on” despite the fact that Jobs is taking a break for a while.

When Jobs announced he would not be at Macworld 2009 in January, a lot of people clung to the hope that there might be a surprise keynote from the CEO. Once Macworld ended (Jobsless, of course), focus shifted to the fuss over a possible SEC probe regarding the press releases about Steve Jobs health and whether or not Apple purposely kept Steve’s health under wraps in order to control share prices.

The CEO reported a healthy blood pressure during last October’s MacBook event. Then on January 5, Steve posted a letter on the Apple website stating that he had a hormonal imbalance that was affecting his health, but it was a minor problem that would be easily remedied. Just nine days later on January 14, a new letter from the Apple CEO revealed that his health issues were far more serious than anticipated and that he would have to take a temporary leave (six months) from the company.

While companies are not required to report to the SEC (or anyone, for that matter) on the health of its employees, as those are private matters, the affect of rumors on Apple’s stock price was enough to raise suspicion as to whether or not the company somehow benefited from the obvious jumps and dips.

We maintain that Steve's absence is more a case of Apple saying they can play house while Daddy is away in order to put shareholders' minds at ease and are hopeful that Jobs will return in June (six months after he announced his temporary leave) for the launch of the new iPhone.

Share:
4
Comments
Read more
X
Submit

Comments
Add your comment
mi1ez 24/02/2009 21:43
Hide
-0+

Well, to be fair, he is ill...

LePhuronn 24/02/2009 21:55
Hide
-0+

Apple need more than plans for a new CEO, they need to account for the massive drop in sales they'll see when Jobs steps down. Love them or hate them, Jobs' personality has kept the shiny shiny exclusive image and the "Apple Tax" going.

Unless they clone him or find another oratory, reality-bending God, the thin veil perpetuating Apple's extortionate prices is going to come crashing down with Jobs' departure with no way of justifying it.

Hopefully prices will come down (I'd snap up a unibody MacBook in seconds if they reached reasonable prices), but I doubt it - more like sales will crash, taking share prices with it.

And Jobs will probably come back again.

david__t 25/02/2009 14:06
Hide
-0+

I would wager that 95% of people who own an apple product don't even know who Steve Jobs is, and I bet 99% of people in the workd don't know either. If an entire company's future rests on 1 person even though it has the huge financial success of iTunes & the ipod / iPhone then something is seriously wrong.

LePhuronn 25/02/2009 19:43
Hide
-0+

@david__t:

It's not so much Apple's customer base (although many Mac customers do know who Steve is - Apple, specifically Mac, is a subculture with Jobs as a visible subject of that culture) it's Apple's investors and business structure that are so reliant on him and his "reality distortion field". The very fact that they've given his vocal ability and presence such a bullshit term show how much he's revered.

The key fact is that the slightest sniff that he's ill sent investors into a panic and Apple's stock dropped a ton. It turns out he was fine and stock went back up. I cannot comprehend such a reliance on one man - if Mark Zuckerberg had a hormone problem, would Facebook's stock crash? Would Google have problems if any of their front-men had issues?

So yes, something is seriously wrong for Appleville to put so much stock in one man.

Best offers

Newsletters


OK