or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Steve Jobs missed out on $10 billion from stock options adjustment
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs missed out on $10 billion from stock options adjustment - Page 2

post #41 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

My first IRA was built up to 19k in 2000. After the big crash, and 911, it was worth 11k. Another year later and my "broker" at ML had it down to 8k. He didn't think Apple was a good idea.

In 2003 I took that IRA Account away from Merrill Lynch and sank it into Apple.

Today its worth over 50k. 600% return in six years.

Back in the days when the Cube was tanking I tried to convince an uncle of mine who was in charge of the insurance money from when my dad passed to take $10,000 of my funds and invest it in Apple. Apple was selling for something like $17 or 20 a share at the time. I really wish he had said yes. There have been 2 stock splits since then, plus the current ridiculous price. Half a million dollars in stock would have been really nice.
post #42 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

I'm probably the furthest thing from a bleeding heart liberal, but there's gotta be a point when you have so much money another $10 billion just won't change your life personally. I'd love to see Steve Jobs publicly go after a major world problem with the same energy he does at Apple. I only say publicly because I'm sure he contributes to many things, but you rarely hear about it.

Understand that, with guys like Jobs and Gates, it's really not about making money. The money flows in as a natural result of their passion. These types are driven by some inner demon to do what they do. Steve Jobs wanted to make a dent in the universe and he has done so. So did Gates. With them it's the DOING of it, not the reward, that drives them. That goes for most self-made men. And has been stated in another post, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are responsible for literally millions of jobs being created over the now three decades since they started the personal computer industry.

And I'm more than a little annoyed at the thought of some committee or agency, or ethical formula deciding how much money is "enough" for an individual. President Obama said almost those words last week I believe. He wondered how much income was enough for an individual or corporation, a natural result of socialist thinking I guess. So at which point should society confiscate or redistribute someone's wealth and who decides what is enough?
post #43 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

My first IRA was built up to 19k in 2000. After the big crash, and 911, it was worth 11k. Another year later and my "broker" at ML had it down to 8k. He didn't think Apple was a good idea.

In 2003 I took that IRA Account away from Merrill Lynch and sank it into Apple.

Today its worth over 50k. 600% return in six years.

Only $50K?
So you didn't put all $8K into AAPL?
Had you actually "sank" all $8000 into Apple in 2003 (at a high of $11.83 for a total of ~676 shares), you would now have 1352 shares at $252 (total of $340,704)
post #44 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim View Post

A few billion here, a few billion there ... pretty soon your talking about real money here.

What are you, Nancy Pelosi?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #45 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

This is why America is the way it is today; the few wealthy and many, many poor.



You've described any country in the world, at any given point in recorded history. Nothing unique to the US, bub.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #46 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by donlphi View Post

I'm probably the furthest thing from a bleeding heart liberal, but there's gotta be a point when you have so much money another $10 billion just won't change your life personally. I'd love to see Steve Jobs publicly go after a major world problem with the same energy he does at Apple. I only say publicly because I'm sure he contributes to many things, but you rarely hear about it.

It's really no one's business what he (or anyone else, for that matter) decides to do with his money. You control your own money, so YOU make decisions that you can stand behind.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #47 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

Back in the days when the Cube was tanking
...
There have been 2 stock splits since then, plus the current ridiculous price. Half a million dollars in stock would have been really nice.

Not to be picky (okay I am) but there was only one stock split (Feb 2005) after the cube was released.
There was a split a month prior to its release.
post #48 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

Uh oh, here we go...



Who exactly are you to make that decision for anybody else?



Greed isn't the problem in America today.

Jealousy and entitlement are.

If you don't think greed is a problem then you are probably greedy.
I do agree that jealousy and entitlement are also a problem.
Greed has been a problem in the USA for a long time. As is other parts of the world.
post #49 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ View Post

If you don't think greed is a problem then you are probably greedy.
I do agree that jealousy and entitlement are also a problem.
Greed has been a problem in the USA for a long time. As is other parts of the world.

"Greed" is term used by jealous people.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #50 of 76
You do understand that dumb implies that reasonable people at the time would have thought Jobs decision was bad. Hindsight is a luxury investors do not have when decisions are being made. Further, many people who know Jobs say his main motivation isn't money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While Arends suggested Jobs' move in 2003 was the "dumbest trade ever," Jobs has also been behind some quite profitable deals.
post #51 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic

Uh oh, here we go...

Who exactly are you to make that decision for anybody else?

Greed isn't the problem in America today.

Jealousy and entitlement are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ View Post

If you don't think greed is a problem then you are probably greedy.
I do agree that jealousy and entitlement are also a problem.
Greed has been a problem in the USA for a long time. As is other parts of the world.

Hmmm... Greed, Jealousy... I think you guys are onto something...

Maybe, like Letterman, you should make a list of the "Top 10 Things Wrong With With the US!" ..."With the World!"

...Then you could type the list into a computer-- an iPad is certainly up to the job!

...but, sigh, you wouldn't be allowed to show the list in public...

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #52 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

My first IRA was built up to 19k in 2000. After the big crash, and 911, it was worth 11k. Another year later and my "broker" at ML had it down to 8k. He didn't think Apple was a good idea.

In 2003 I took that IRA Account away from Merrill Lynch and sank it into Apple.

Today its worth over 50k. 600% return in six years.

Well, aren't you Mr. Smarty Pants!
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #53 of 76
When you get over a hundred million or so, you reach, realistically, the limit of anything you can have for yourself and your family. The rest of the money is just for leverage. Thus, he sold Pixar basically for a seat on the ABC Board. Other money is spent for many things, but most of them for the main love of his life: Apple. It's harder to dislodge him as all hell, so he's ensconced pretty well. Wait for the 80-year-old Jobs getting a third liver, second heart, and coming on stage to announce the wireless, nanosphere implantable computer: the iEvolution!
post #54 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Greed" is term used by jealous people.

Uh, no. Actually, saying people are jealous of you is simply attempting to deny that you are greedy.

Or, to put it another way. Live simply, so that others may simply live.

But something tells me you aren't going to listen to that advice.....

Or, to put it another way...

A man has ten cows, but none of his neighbors have any. So?
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #55 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Greed" is term used by jealous people.

Excellent point.
post #56 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by justflybob View Post


A man has ten cows, but none of his neighbors have any. So?

So?

Did the guy with the ten cows steal them?

Did the guy with zero cows work for them?
post #57 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidW View Post

If I recall, Steve turned over his options in exchange for restricted stocks because there was a back dating issue involve with those options. Even though he didn't legally have to give them up. Steve didn't want to be accused of profitting from back dated options when it came time to exercise them. Which he will eventually have to do. He didn't make the exchange because he thought he could make more money holding the stock.

I believe you are correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Greed" is term used by jealous people.

No, it's the word used to describe avarice, also known as one of the Seven Deadly Sins for 2,000 years or thereabouts.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #58 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by justflybob View Post

Uh, no. Actually, saying people are jealous of you is simply attempting to deny that you are greedy.

Or, to put it another way. Live simply, so that others may simply live.

But something tells me you aren't going to listen to that advice.....

Or, to put it another way...

A man has ten cows, but none of his neighbors have any. So?

One person's wealth (or an entire group of people) has nothing to do with your status... poor, rich or otherwise! Don't begrudge another the fruits of their labor, unless they got it by sticking a gun in your ribs, or by taxation without representation.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #59 of 76
Success and greed are hardly the same thing. Saying they are the same does not make it so.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #60 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

No, it's the word used to describe avarice, also known as one of the Seven Deadly Sins for 2,000 years or thereabouts.

Oh, I don't know about that. For example, there's a difference between 'gluttony' and 'hunger.'

'Avarice' is such a religiously loaded term. I interpret 'greed' to mean the desire for more wealth rather than less. And, as with any other such attribute, taken by itself, it can be good or bad.... it just depends. But it is fair to say that it is the desire for more wealth that makes us all better off.

Independent of that, SpamSandwich's post had to do with the type of people that use the term, not the meaning of the term itself.
post #61 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Success and greed are hardly the same thing. Saying they are the same does not make it so.

Of course not.

But the desire for more wealth ('greed') is often a determinant of 'success' (which, btw, is another value-laden term.... care to explain what you mean by 'success?')
post #62 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

"Greed" is term used by jealous people.

Good one! It is so tiresome these days when "CEO" is some kind of bad word, and successful business people are "greedy" and "stealing" (???) from society. (Who is society? Stealing what? What did people have without industry?)

Yes, there are bad CEOs and crooks out there. No, it doesn't mean industry is evil.

Its so annoying when someone smokes a giant bongload and then tells people inventing and packaging new products, that make people's lives better, that they are "greedy corporate SOBs." Great, great contribution
post #63 of 76
The Fake Steve Jobs hates to hear this. He's one of the biggest proponents of the myth that Jobs was "hurting" Apple with this stock deal. The Wall Street Journal had a guy on the "Get Jobs" story too.

Jobs, remember was forced out after he brought in John Sculley, the "serious business" guy, who had no real concept of what to do, just making money. Wall Street screwed him out of the company that he started with Woz.

So there's no frickin' way that he was going to go for the money, except for making himself very, very difficult to remove. Apple will be run his way, as long as he survives. His money is just a way of telling Wall Street to go f. themselves, he ain't goin' nowhere.
post #64 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Had Apple co-founder Steve Jobs not cancelled his stock options in exchange for $75 million in shares in 2003, he would have an extra $10.3 billion in profits today.

The revelation comes courtesy of a new column Tuesday from Brett Arends of MarketWatch. He noted that the tech bubble burst in 2000 had left many companies hurting, including Apple, which dropped from a peak of $36 down to $7.

In 2003, stock options granted to employees "seemed completely worthless," he wrote. "After all, Apple stock would have to climb all the way back up to those giddy heights before the options even started to show a profit again."

Apple employees were allowed to exchange their options for a smaller number that became valuable at a lower price. Jobs canceled his options in return for $75 million in shares, a move that was said to allow the company to offer more options to other staff, and reportedly was not done due to the diminished stock price.

"Jobs held 15 million options at an exercise price of $9.15, which meant they started to gain value only if Apple stock exceeded that price, and 40 million options at an exercise price of $21.80," Arends wrote. "Apple at the time was little more than $7 a share. (These prices have been adjusted to reflect the subsequent stock split.) Total value: $12.8 billion."

"In other words," he continued, "Steve Jobs missed out on $10.3 billion in extra profits."

Of course, Jobs' 10 million shares are still worth about $2.5 billion today. And last year, he was named the No. 43 wealthiest American with a net worth of $5.1 billion by Forbes.

The chief executive famously takes a salary of only $1 for his work at Apple, but receives millions in compensation in the form of stock options.

While Arends suggested Jobs' move in 2003 was the "dumbest trade ever," Jobs has also been behind some quite profitable deals. Perhaps his best move was purchasing Pixar from filmmaker George Lucas in 1986 for $10 million. He sold the company to Disney in 2006 for $7.4 billion in stock, and was also given a seat on the Disney Board of Directors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5INUyqCWrA
post #65 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Understand that, with guys like Jobs and Gates, it's really not about making money. The money flows in as a natural result of their passion. These types are driven by some inner demon to do what they do. Steve Jobs wanted to make a dent in the universe and he has done so. So did Gates. With them it's the DOING of it, not the reward, that drives them. That goes for most self-made men. And has been stated in another post, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are responsible for literally millions of jobs being created over the now three decades since they started the personal computer industry.

And I'm more than a little annoyed at the thought of some committee or agency, or ethical formula deciding how much money is "enough" for an individual. President Obama said almost those words last week I believe. He wondered how much income was enough for an individual or corporation, a natural result of socialist thinking I guess. So at which point should society confiscate or redistribute someone's wealth and who decides what is enough?

Perhaps you should read the full transcript of President Obama's speech.* He certainly didn't imply that at all.

*http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...uincy-illinois
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidW View Post

If I recall, Steve turned over his options in exchange for restricted stocks because there was a back dating issue involve with those options. Even though he didn't legally have to give them up. Steve didn't want to be accused of profitting from back dated options when it came time to exercise them. Which he will eventually have to do. He didn't make the exchange because he thought he could make more money holding the stock.

You best get your memory checked. And your conclusions as well.

Everything you stated is either a mistake or a lie.
post #67 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Perhaps you should read the full transcript of President Obama's speech.* He certainly didn't imply that at all.

*http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...uincy-illinois

You're right. He didn't imply anything,
He flat out said, "I mean, I do think at a certain point youve made enough money."
post #68 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Oh, I don't know about that. For example, there's a difference between 'gluttony' and 'hunger.'

'Avarice' is such a religiously loaded term. I interpret 'greed' to mean the desire for more wealth rather than less. And, as with any other such attribute, taken by itself, it can be good or bad.... it just depends. But it is fair to say that it is the desire for more wealth that makes us all better off.

Independent of that, SpamSandwich's post had to do with the type of people that use the term, not the meaning of the term itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Of course not.

But the desire for more wealth ('greed') is often a determinant of 'success' (which, btw, is another value-laden term.... care to explain what you mean by 'success?')

Yes, of course there's a difference. That's precisely my point. I have a problem with trying turn vices into virtues as a matter of convenience. When someone accuses another of greed, this is hardly automatically an indicator of "jelously" but can very well be an accurate observation of excessive acquisitiveness, which could be entirely well-deserved. Trying to assign an ethical observation to a "type" in order to escape its implications, is a cynical exercise.

Naturally these are all laden terms, which doesn't make them meaningless. Ethics can give them meaning. It's become popular to make all these terms value-neutral.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #69 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

You best get your memory checked. And your conclusions as well.

Everything you stated is either a mistake or a lie.

Geez, lighten up Francis. A mistake is just a mistake.
post #70 of 76
Only a story a market geek would write. "Gee, if I only had bought XYZ in 1985, I'd be richer today." What a waste of electrons.
post #71 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Geez, lighten up Francis. A mistake is just a mistake.

Then remove it and I will mine.
post #72 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

You're right. He didn't imply anything,
He flat out said, "I mean, I do think at a certain point youve made enough money."

He certainly did. Though he didn't share the same sentiment when he was accepting millions of campaign dollars from taxpayer-funded sinking ships like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I'm sure he's simply had a change of heart, and will be doing all his post-presidential lobbying and speaking engagements for meals, lodging, and airfare.

I was hoping to go the rest of my life without seeing a bigger assclown than Bush in the nation's highest office. I didn't even get a day.
post #73 of 76
counting someone else's coins...

"news" as apple related as SJ taking his morning poop
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
post #74 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLoveStuff View Post

Maybe just being alive is good enough!

Well said. You got 100 million +hundreds more from wherever, the last thing on your mind should be how you could've got 10 billion when you're not likely to live another 15 years. Even if you're 100% healthy it shouldn't matter.

Unless of course you're the type to donate 9 billion to whatever and I don't think that's the case.
post #75 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Then remove it and I will mine.

What are you, like 3 years old?
post #76 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

What are you, like 3 years old?

Onkha called DavidW out for falsely accusing someone. Why shouldn't the accusation be removed?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Steve Jobs missed out on $10 billion from stock options adjustment