SEC findings seen echoing those of Apple's internal probe
Given the broad scale of Apple Computer's independent probe into its stock options irregularities, any subsequent investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission is likely to turn up consistent results, one Wall Street analyst says.
PiperJaffray analyst Gene Munster told clients on Friday that the findings of Apple's investigation -- published prior to the open of the stock market -- were reassuring in that they reiterated current management was not guilty of any misconduct.
The analyst had previously stated his belief that there was a less than 5 percent likelihood Apple chief executive Steve Jobs was involved in the falsification of options documents.
"We view [Apple's findings] as a positive given investor's concerns that this issue could lead to the removal of Steve Jobs," he wrote in a research note.
Munster, at the same time, implied that some investors may choose to act with caution ahead of any formal comments from the SEC on the matter. However, he added, "given the scope of Apple's exhaustive internal investigation, we believe that any SEC findings would be consistent with Apple's findings."
In its delayed 10K filing on Friday, Apple said its independent counsel and forensic accountants reviewed stock option grants made on 259 dates, in which they spent over 26,500 person-hours searching more than one million physical and electronic documents and interviewing more than 40 current and former directors, officers, employees, and advisors.
In all, Apple's investigation turned up irregularities regarding 6,428 grants on 42 dates. After forfeitures, it recorded a non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $84 million (after tax) to reflect the required restatement changes.
Munster called the financial impact of the restatement "immaterial," as it carries a mere 2 percent impact to the company's net income over the last nine years.
PiperJaffray analyst Gene Munster told clients on Friday that the findings of Apple's investigation -- published prior to the open of the stock market -- were reassuring in that they reiterated current management was not guilty of any misconduct.
The analyst had previously stated his belief that there was a less than 5 percent likelihood Apple chief executive Steve Jobs was involved in the falsification of options documents.
"We view [Apple's findings] as a positive given investor's concerns that this issue could lead to the removal of Steve Jobs," he wrote in a research note.
Munster, at the same time, implied that some investors may choose to act with caution ahead of any formal comments from the SEC on the matter. However, he added, "given the scope of Apple's exhaustive internal investigation, we believe that any SEC findings would be consistent with Apple's findings."
In its delayed 10K filing on Friday, Apple said its independent counsel and forensic accountants reviewed stock option grants made on 259 dates, in which they spent over 26,500 person-hours searching more than one million physical and electronic documents and interviewing more than 40 current and former directors, officers, employees, and advisors.
In all, Apple's investigation turned up irregularities regarding 6,428 grants on 42 dates. After forfeitures, it recorded a non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $84 million (after tax) to reflect the required restatement changes.
Munster called the financial impact of the restatement "immaterial," as it carries a mere 2 percent impact to the company's net income over the last nine years.
Comments
Sure you can say, "I see them coming out ahead on this deal" but that can be interpreted two ways.
1) you predict them coming out ahead on the deal.
2) you actually see them coming out ahead on the deal.
In the case of your title, you mean #1, but I first read it as #2. I'm probably not the only one.
Moral? Fix the title.
-Clive
I hope that the SEC does echo Apple's findings so that we can have a great 2007 and I can spend lots of money!
When i saw the title, I concluded it meant that someone thought they would have the same outcomes, not that they actually have.
If i was to say I see apple producing an iPhone it is meaning that i predict they will produce one.
Maybe it is just used differently your side of the pond.
stu
"Person-Hours"... he he
I believe you meant to say "s/he s/he."
Where does it say they decided to start an investigation yet?
AFAIK - nothing decided by SEC.
All they got so far is a lot of Christmas post from Apple. LOL!
http://news.yahoo.com/i/738
Here's to hoping that one day Apple can come clean and be lawsuit free.
To do so, they will need to clean up their corporate money desires as well as their quality control (which is slipping lately) as well as the iTMS/iPod tie-up (monopoly?).
As far as I know, Apple is not under investigation for anything. True, there are a number of lawsuits being undertaken filed by the usual Shylocks that sue at the drop of a penny; however, none have been initiated by federal authorities.
As for your comment re "quality control…slipping lately," could you back up your statement. Please don't support it with hearsay, give us the facts. Interesting to hear that the one company that bends over backwards to maintain its position as one of the top service/support companies in the world could be castigated with such libelous statements.
Are you suggesting that a or a number of federal government agencies (including the SEC) is/are investigating Apple for creating a monoply with iTunes/iPod or any other of the cases sited? If so, you are dead wrong.
As far as I know, Apple is not under investigation for anything. True, there are a number of lawsuits being undertaken filed by the usual Shylocks that sue at the drop of a penny; however, none have been initiated by federal authorities.
As for your comment re "quality control?slipping lately," could you back up your statement. Please don't support it with hearsay, give us the facts. Interesting to hear that the one company that bends over backwards to maintain its position as one of the top service/support companies in the world could be castigated with such libelous statements.
The suits in question have been charged by individuals/groups who have had their lawyer(s) file in federal courts, an action that basically anybody can do rather easily. To suggest that Apple has to clean up their money desires (whatever that means), have cause for damages because of alleged poor quality control re the Macbook, or that iTunes/iPod are de facto monopoly are now under federal investigations via indictments laid by a federal grand jury is complete erroneous.
Worse is that because of these allegations, which I would suggest are rather frivious if not assinine, the inuendos that formulate when one says that, "Here's to hoping that one day Apple can come clean and be lawsuit free."
All I said was there were several suits mentioned; said nothing about the SEC so I guess maybe I'm not wrong about that. If I am, could you back up your statement?
Also, this current stock affair stinks; period. It is just a few jerks who already had more money than the average Joe will make in a lifetime just trying to get a few more bucks without doing anything for it.
As far as quality control: you haven't been here long enough to have seen some of my previous posts on the topic. My first Mac, a MacPlus, worked flawlessly for 13 years. Sure, it was missing a key on the keyboard and there were a few scratches here and there, but this damage primarily resulted from the day I dropped it down the stairs while moving. It retired in grace when I no longer had the room for it. RIP.
Along the way, I bought other Macs (I am on number 17 at the moment). The first several worked fine. Then the troubles began. (I just woke up so this is a sleepy rant)
Logic boards: more than a few replaced (off the top of my head: seven or eight). DOA machines: three total. Crappy, crappy, crappy, crappy (did I say crappy?) AppleCare call service (in Japan). Badly built case on my PB 15- machine replaced. Replaced power supplies- 5 to date, I think. Replaced batteries (although a Sony battery, Apple didn't test it properly in my opinion): 2 or 3. Monitors with dead pixels: 3 (no other maker I have ever owned has had the same). Poorly installed USB ports: several. I have had trouble with 8 out of 10 of my last machines. Scratchy screen on an iPod: 2. These things should not happen. The troubles resulted in down time for me, at the same time some people at Apple were getting filthy rich off of my money.
End of rant.
Indeed, I have had troubles. My friends have had troubles. My old company had enough troubles so that they will no longer buy Apple products, period. The boss there was pretty interesting: he felt that any product needing two repairs (not to mention for the same problem) in one year was a sign a of a crappy maker, and his company could not rely on that company's products. It only happened with the only Mac the company had (more than 100 PCs) , and that was the last Mac they will ever buy.
I love Macs and Apple products. I just wish they would make them better, and have said several times that of all the electronic devices I have bought, the only maker with whose products I have ever had issues with was Apple. My house looks like a small electronics store, so I know my gear. Only Apple, the company that says "It just works", has sold me products that did not work to their specifications.
End rant 2.
That is my evidence. Libelous? I think not. It is all true. Before calling someone's statements libelous, ask for more explanation first.
All that said, I am waiting for MWSF so that I can spend more money!!!!8)
Well, well, well. I am dead wrong. Geez. My wife would say that wasn't the first time!?
True, you didn't quote the SEC, but the articles you referenced did.
As for you evidence, it is purely anecdotal. Now on my 89th Mac, the only AppleCare that I ever had applied for was on a laptop that I passed on to my sister-in-law. Having overseered hundreds of Macs, more than
that on monitors, practically everything that Apple ever made, and a few handfuls of PCs, I truly can testify that the Apples have just shone all the way.
Always bought the best and got my moneys worth. Not that you didn't.
But I would just like to add, that although I did not have the same experience that you have had, I did feel empathy for your issues. That is until you put the blame on Apple for Sony's failure. That is like slamming the prof for not asking you the right questions so you could get a 100.
Thanks, but I do not want your empathy. I want machines that work right, right out of the box and that is not happening. It should happen for everyone, or the management should not be getting rich.
About the battery: I bought the computer from Apple.
As for you not wanting my empathy, empathy can be given but never taken.
And about the battery and everything else that you have had to contend to, it is like Oliver Wendall Holmes said, "If you want to change a child's education, you better start a hundred years before he is born." In other words, it might be best if you waited a few more decades for MWSF.
Happy New Year!