Lawsuits against Apple likely in light of Jobs' latest disclosure - Page 2

Apple is in the business of making computers and peripherals. As a matter of their business model, they allow people to buy shares in the company in order to raise capitol and spread risk and reward. They are not - as is often glibly quoted - in the business of making money for their shareholders.

They should make money for investors, they likely will do so regularly as the value of the company increases, and every so often they might not. Shareholders have to understand they are in for better or worse. If you don't like how much money you're making with AAPL then sell it.

Suing the company that is not making enough short term money for your taste is (a) indicative of a very poor understanding of investments and (b) throwing gasoline on any existing flames as you will drain capital from the company itself with your lawsuit and its associated direct costs of litigation not top mention the compounded flight from AAPL stock value.

If they sue it is completely retarded and disgusting.

F*ck em'.

I would be very surprised, in fact it's almost impossible to believe, if both recent messages from Jobs to the Apple community (first, "looks like things are getting better, I expect to be back to normal in a few months" followed by "we just learned things are more complicated and I'll be taking a leave of absence) where not carefully reviewed by the legal department in advance. In that case, it would be even harder to believe that either was designed to deceive investors. UNLESS (and I don't believe this at all, but people will look into it) there was insider trading associated with this. Obviously if the board (or just Steve) sold a ton of shares between the two announcements that would at least provide an incentive for deception. Without that, what would be the friggin' point of trying to deceive anyone?

SJ: "Ha ha, I know that I'm really sick and will need to take a leave of absence, so let me go on the record and make national news by stating the opposite. That'll make it extra fun to make an about face a week and half later. Sound good to you, Mr. Lawyer?"

Lawyer: "Great idea. Don't forget to get a note from your doctor before you make the first announcement so you can prove that you deceived investors. If people just think the medical advice changed between the two announcements it won't be anywhere near as fun. Deceiving investors for no reason and for no corporate or personal gain is what we live for, right Mr. Jobs?"

If someone recorded that dialog (or if there were insider trading) Apple might be in a spot of trouble. Otherwise, a shareholder lawsuit will go nowhere. I hope the presiding judge scowls at the plaintiff's attorneys and makes them feel bad.

And you edited that for CLARITY?:l ol:

Sounds like Beltway BS to me.

It's worse than that. Apple can not legally disclose information about employees' health under Federal law.

Since the law says the can not disclose health information, what were they supposed to do?

Not to mention, of course, that Jobs only found out about the latest info this week - so no one was hiding anything. F'ing leeches.

Have you been off the planet for the last 8 months? In case you hadn't noticed, LOTS of stocks have dropped by more than 50% - even with healthy CEOs. And, in particular, stocks which has stratospheric climbs corrected more than stocks that had been flat. Over a reasonable time frame, Apple's stock has been a better investment than most. Even over the last 6 months, it has not been all that much worse than similar companies.

It is interesting that you bring up house insurance. Most people do have insurance if
they own a house. On the other hand, very few people buy insurance when they own
a stock (which is very easy to do by buying long term put options corresponding to
their long stock positions, for example). If people have not protected their stock
portfolios with insurance, it is not the responsibility of the companies in their portfolio
to reimburse them, any more than it is for a homebuilder to reimburse a homeowner
whose house burns down without the owner having bought fire insurance.

Nobody told you to invest in Apple or even the stock market, money is lost on the stock market every bloody second, deal with it, you choose to play the game, deal with the consequence, you lost money.

Couldn't have put it any better.

can i sue these ppl for driving down apple's share price after it has to pay them out (and hence decrease returns to shareholders)? or perhaps even if apple's share price goes down in light of there being this lawsuit against it and there being a possibility of having to pay a settlement?

An investor would have to be very gullible to believe for a moment that Steve Jobs is telling the truth or that unnamed sources are reliable and enough to state categorically that Steve Jobs doesn't fight a recurrence of cancer.

I don't have a clue as to whether or not Steve Jobs is battling cancer, once again, but all circumstances - including the silence of the Apple Board of directors - point to the fact that Steve Jobs is hiding the truth from us.

What part don't you believe? That Steve needs a medical leave of absence? That his condition is more complicated than he thought a week ago? Or MAYBE he's been dead for a month and it's the silent board of directors that has been posting these announcements about his health. They just don't want to spoil the coming announcement of the iPhone nano, the Apple netbook, the midrange tower, and the $300 superpowered Mac mini? Once the stock spikes with that announcement (which will be a lie of course) they will all cash out and move to a country without an extradition treaty to the US. Is that what non-gullible people believe?

Some schmuck "shareholders" file a class action lawsuit through some scumbag lawfirm. Apple retains outside counsel. The scumbag lawyers file tons of motions and rack up billable hours, all of which they'll pad into the settlement agreement they think they will win, or may actually win. These fees, together with Apple's legal bill plus the cost of any possible settlement comes out of... the over 24 billion dollar cash war chest Apple's built to keep the company healthy in times of trouble, a tab ultimately paid for by... the same idiot savant shareholders who sued Apple in the first place.

I'm up for filing a class action lawsuit against anyone who files any stupid class action lawsuit that further diminishes my return on investment. I'm now looking for pro bono lawyers who also have a stake in Apple and are tired of this friggin circus.

That is the crux of the issue. They should have said NOTHING. As soon as they opened their mouths, they have an obligation to ensure that the information they deliver is correct. That said, the question on whether or not to sue lies in whether or not you believe that they actually found out about it this week, or if they were hiding the matter until after Macworld. I don't think they hid it, but, frankly, I can't fault someone who does. It looks extremely shady.

Really?

The sole word out of Apple about this would be a massive deliberate verifiable lie? That opens up a liability world of hurt that no legal department - not to mention a world-class board made of other companies CEOs - would let out the door... that's your rock solid conclusion?

Look, a lot of people are starting to think this was planned as I believe as well.
Experts in the field say that a hormonal balance would not turn into complications the way Steve is implying unless it is a rare case of bad diabetes or he has a returning tumor.

The also believe that this step down was long planned believing that the step down was probably planned back in December and while it doesn't go word for word what I posted (see below), they believe everything from Steve not doing Mac World to the latest absence was planned back in December.

If true, there could be legit lawsuits, why, when you are CEO, or President of US, Vice President, or any influential leader, you have to release your medical records to the public, and not only is Steve the opposite, he is perceived as lying which is illegal as he is directly linked to the overall stock price and if it turns out that he's lying, there could be repercussions and Apple could get sued for millions.

Anyway, after taking a step back, as well as hearing many tech proffesionals also say they think this was planned, they go further and say HE WILL NOT BE BACK.

Please know, I and sure many others, believe he should rest and do what it takes to get well.

That said, when you DO step back, its easy to see that this was probably planned.

Announcement that Apple will no longer be at Mac World
Then Jobs annoucnes he won't be at the last one, (REALLY STRANGE AS THIS IS so unlike Jobs, last one? Are you kidding).
Then the rumor sites state all the rumors
Then comes Mac World and no new products, rumor sites are 100% wrong, normally, the sites get at least ~40-60% of rumors, this time it was 100%. Very unlikely, meaning the products were pulled in order to release latter, sometime before Steve comes back (which he won't as he will announce they don't need him)
Then comes the Hormone letter.
Then comes the leave of absence.

This has clearly been planned, the overall goal will be to release new products to prove that Apple doesn't need Jobs.

Steve will not be coming back.

The sad thing is this plan was probably planned by Steve, and I and others wish him well, but I highly doubt he will be back.

Be blessed and safe and healthy, to Steve, and all, and all of our loved ones and ourselves.

It's a sad time at Apple as know one has been so instrumental as Steve has been.

My guess is a lot of the "outraged" are shortsellers, who are out to get $$ any way they can.
They make their money when Aaple goes down, and they lose when it goes up. so they're in the blogs trashing Aapl up one side and down the other. They're also lobbying the media.
somehow someone is always trying to bring Apple down.
Good luck SJ.

I would like to sue the suers (interesting how that sounds so much like "sewers" which is where these pond scum come from).

I mean why should they get all the money.

At least ask for personal medial history of each and every one of the suers to be made public before the case goes ahead. Then we'll see how they like being treated badly.

These dicks need to be held accountable for the fact that they are the ones destroying the economy with their stupid litigation. How can Apple succeed when it's being litigated by every dick worried about Jobs' health or by buying a patent that Apple has already made years previous? The reason Apple's stocks act like a yo yo is because of these litigating dilholes.

What a bunch of CRAP, nobody sues when I get sick!!

Leave the man alone, who cares if shares take a dive, has everyone forgotten where Apple stock was ten, fifteen, twenty years ago? They should be happy that it is where it is now. Money grubbing f*@%tards!!!

So while the economy is in the toilet and the people that would benefit from winning a case like this aren't suffering anyway. It's the common man that is being squeezed by frivolous litigation like this.