Rumors and Speculation About SJ’s Health

  • Avatar

    Posted: 31 December 2008 12:36 PM #16

    Winterpool - 31 December 2008 03:56 PM

    If anything, I shouldn’t be surprised if the Street (and many Apple fanatics) would prefer Steve to be maintained as a figurehead as long as possible, even in a state of living death.

    Winterpool gets extra credit for tying in the Horus Heresy books with Steve Jobs.

    Signature

    Black Swan Counter: 9 (Banks need money, Jobs needs a break, Geithner has no plan, Cuomo’s grandstanding, .Gov needs a hobby, GS works for money, flash crash, is that bubbling crude?).

    For those who look, a flash allows one to see farther.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 12:43 PM #17

    Eric Landstrom - 31 December 2008 04:24 PM

    I respect your opinion, however, the rumors cumulatively work like the lie said long enough and further silence doesn’t address the cumulative effect that rumor mongering is having upon the stock. As such, I’m more inclined to activism. To that end, I fired an email off to Goldman suggesting that if Apple addressed my concern that the goal posts are not being redefined so that Mr. Jobs can continue to fulfill the role of CEO, Apple will have at last addressed the street’s concerns on the issue and would be able to tolerate Apple’s reluctance to continually address the issue of Mr. Jobs health every time some yahoo brought it up. I further suggest that if anybody has a line into any Apple spokespeople, that they share this concern so that Apple can be put to rest the health issue in the best way possible without making public Mr. Jobs’ health records.

    I hope you’re right and one response from Apple might put the issue to rest. It’s a sad reality far too many people see this multi-billion dollar global organization as a one-person shop and focus on SJ and fascination with his person or personality still generates this much interest. It’s a sad state of affairs after 12 years of very hard work that some view the current success and future prospects of the company hinging on the role of one person. He’s not a stupid man and I’m sure he hasn’t planned to maintain an integral role in the day-to-day operations of Apple for the rest of what I hope is a long and happy life.

    The Expo decision has most likely been long in coming and makes economic sense. It is not an Apple-owned event. There’s one major Apple trade show a year (WWDC) and that event is becoming far more important for the growth of the Apple product eco-system than the January IDG expo.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 31 December 2008 12:47 PM #18

    There are very few CEOs of Fortune 500 companies whom I can name. What needs to eventually happen is that SJ needs seen as somewhat irrelevant to the success of Apple. (That may already exist but the Street does not see it that way.) Until that time, AAPL will be susceptible to these machinations.

    And, yes, Apple needs to be proactive in making this transition occur. Having others speak at Macworld and other events is a step in the right direction.

    Signature

    “Once we roared like lions for liberty; now we bleat like sheep for security! The solution for America’s problem is not in terms of big government, but it is in big men over whom nobody stands in control but God.”  ?Norman Vincent Peale

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 01:42 PM #19

    A clear factual sensible comment quoted from Infoworld

    http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/12/31/Steve_Jobs_health_rumor_resurfaces_1.html

    This is such nonsense. Jobs did not have “pancreatic cancer”, he had an islet cell tumor, a tumor of the cells that make insulin. This tumor is easily (and has been in his case) completely cured. This tumor does not have the adverse prognosis associated with “pancreatic cancer” , a tumor that involves the exocrine pancreas. He had a whipple procedure to remove the tumor, an extensive but routine operation. People with this procedure typically lose weight because their GI track is not as efficient as it was before the surgery, but they are healthy. Combined with his low fat vegan diet, it is likely that jobs will experience a LONGER than normal lifespan. Journalists and pundits (bloggers) who make these adverse claims are either lazy and do not want to find out the facts, or totally stupid, or are children trying to scare folks, or traders trying to manipulate the stock. Responsible Journalism would not give credence to such poppycock.
    JSM, MD.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 31 December 2008 01:47 PM #20

    There’s a bit of paranoia in the view that these rumors are started to push the stock down. Apple and Steve Jobs are cultural icons, which is a pedestal more than slightly above public company and CEO. There are all sorts of haters who would start and spread such a rumor without financial consideration. There are all sorts of fans who would be concerned for Apple and for Steve himself without financial consideration.

    Information hates a vacuum. It’s been handled badly by Apple and Steve Jobs since his illness. Traders are taking this into account, the same way they historically took the MacWorld events into account to buy low and sell high. Investors need to take the traders into account, and that means taking the rumors into account. That’s life people.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 02:44 PM #21

    Eric Landstrom - 31 December 2008 02:47 PM

    ...until the issue is satisfactorily addressed and further rumor mongering can’t knock three billion out of AAPL market cap in the space of three minutes on the open market, I will continue to say what I please on the issue.

    You’re right, Eric. The only satisfactory solution to this problem is the final one. You should do what you have to do.

    BTW, Eric: We all look up to you here on the AFB. You’re our mentor and, as such, I am greatly concerned about what would happen to the AFB should you have health problems. I hope you’re in good health but I think it behooves you to reveal now, and on demand in the future, any health issues you have.

    I anxiously await your report.

    [ Edited: 31 December 2008 02:56 PM by deasys ]      
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 03:14 PM #22

    As in the ‘Boy who cried Wolf”  this type FUD may soon have less effect. Or conversely it could become a contrarian buy signal. At least the issue of succession has been discussed and the inevetibility of it all is “out there” . I still think -$3 seems cheap for SJ’s exit.

    Too lazy to post on Eric’s thread so you’ll just have to to take your Happy New Years where you find them. May ‘09 give us a little relief before the bottom falls out.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 03:20 PM #23

    my perspective is this:

    apple is facing a double depression.

    aapl has been hit hard along with most stocks this year, but to lose the leader of the entire industry is doubly bad for apple.

    steve left one time before as we all know, but apple and the industry did well for about 7 years then the fumes of SJ were burned up and a decline (really stagnation) happened.

    SJ has aged 40 years in the last 10, but according to a yogurt shop, he’s fine. Macworld is really IDGworld, so this latest round of rumors may very well be about nothing.

    But if he doesn’t show up at WWDC, the double depression begins.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 03:22 PM #24

    Next we’ll see reporters and some obsessed fans camping out at the yogurt shop.  rolleyes

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 03:30 PM #25

    LOL or what about freaky fans digging in the garbage of the Jobs family looking for leftovers in order to analyse their diet…

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 31 December 2008 03:36 PM #26

    OS11 - 31 December 2008 07:20 PM

    But if he doesn’t show up at WWDC, the double depression begins.

    Agreed. 6 month is a long time in this market.

    Signature

    “Once we roared like lions for liberty; now we bleat like sheep for security! The solution for America’s problem is not in terms of big government, but it is in big men over whom nobody stands in control but God.”  ?Norman Vincent Peale

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 31 December 2008 04:17 PM #27

    A few months ago John Martellaro posted a column about this. He pointed out that the SEC requires publicly traded companies to have a succession plan for their top officers. That the SEC has not called Apple out for a violation means that they have the whole SJ health question in hand. They are not required to tell anyone what these plans are, just show that they have a plan.(Unfortunately I can’t find the bloody article on the TMO site any more.) That removed any worry from my mind.

    I suspect that the MacWorld change was a long time coming but is being used as the first step in moving SJ out of the spotlight. In a couple of years he will not be appearing anywhere. In 10 years he won’t be a ‘celebrity’. In 25 years he will retire and there won’t be a ripple on the stock.

    Signature

    Courage is not the absence of fear, that’s insanity.
    Courage is knowing the risks and dangers.
    And doing what needs to be done anyway.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 05:36 PM #28

    Gizmodo did a bit of quick backtracking on their report and changed the wording by adding an ?allegedly? and replaced ?solid source? with ?previously reliable? ? Despite this word-smithing, the Gizmodo report was/is blatantly false and damage was (at least temporarily) done to Apple (AAPL) shareholders. Lame duck SEC needs to take action. I may be spitting into the wind, but I wrote SEC enforcement and “cc"ed other SEC contacts requesting an investigation.

    http://idannyb.wordpress.com/2008/12/31/so-how-is-steve-probably-a-bit-disgusted-with-hack-journalists-and-gizmodo-but-otherwise-just-fine-thank-you/

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 07:27 PM #29

    geoduck - 31 December 2008 08:17 PM

    A few months ago John Martellaro posted a column about this. He pointed out that the SEC requires publicly traded companies to have a succession plan for their top officers. That the SEC has not called Apple out for a violation means that they have the whole SJ health question in hand. They are not required to tell anyone what these plans are, just show that they have a plan.(Unfortunately I can’t find the bloody article on the TMO site any more.) That removed any worry from my mind.

    I suspect that the MacWorld change was a long time coming but is being used as the first step in moving SJ out of the spotlight. In a couple of years he will not be appearing anywhere. In 10 years he won’t be a ‘celebrity’. In 25 years he will retire and there won’t be a ripple on the stock.

    The SEC stipulation is just one of the points of reality that fails to fall on the minds of the rumor-mongers.

    Had Apple made this announcement six months ago it would have been the death knell for January’s event. Announcing one-year ahead Apple will no longer participate provides time for IDG to alter or cancel next year’s event. This was a courtesy. Unfortunately, some see the announcements as nothing more than an opportunity to gain notoriety at the expense of others.

         
  • Posted: 31 December 2008 09:16 PM #30

    In December 1966 Walt Disney died of cancer . I thought the stock would be dead for years if not forever. By October 1971 the 1st of 4 theme parks in Florida opened. Many thought when the great visionary, Walt Disney was no longer here so his company would follow. With Roy Disney over seeing the vision, Disney proved to be bigger than one man. I think when SJ is no longer in charge, whether he dies or retires that Apple will prove there are a lot of very capable visionaries to carry on his legacy.

    Signature

    keep your friends close but your enemies closer