or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Report details Apple's unusual veil of secrecy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Report details Apple's unusual veil of secrecy

post #1 of 162
Thread Starter 
With Apple again failing to advise shareholders that chief executive Steve Jobs underwent major surgery, the New York Times has published a profile of the company's unparalleled aura of secrecy, which stems from products to personnel and everything in between.

The newspaper cited Regis McKenna, a marketing veteran who advised Apple on its approach to dealing with the media back in the 80s, as saying the company's tight-lipped culture began to take shape in earnest around the release of the original Macintosh back in 1984.

"It really started around trying to keep the surprise aspect to product launches, which can have a lot of power," he said, noting that rivals like Microsoft and Sony were all too familiar with plans for the first Mac long before chief executive Steve Jobs pulled back the black cloth.

These days, Apple employees working on secret projects must "pass through a maze of security doors, swiping their badges again and again and finally entering a numeric code to reach their offices," a former employee who recently worked in one of these areas told the Times.

Once inside these top-secret areas, employees are often monitored by surveillance cameras as they work. And those testing the most sensitive projects are instructed "to cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

These measures often result in employees learning about new Apple products for the first time alongside the general public, like former systems engineer Edward Eigerman, who along with his co-workers, had no clue the company was about reinvent the music industry with the iPod until the day it launched.

"No one that I worked with saw that coming," he said.

According to the Times, Eigerman was fired from Apple four years ago for his role in an incident that saw one of his colleagues leak a pre-release copy of some unannounced software product to an Apple business customer as a favor. He notes that the company actively attempts to sniff out leakers and terminate their employment.

Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller is said to be among the members of Apple's top brass who play an integral role in helping to track down employees who disclose advance product information to members of the press. At times, it's reported, he has held internal product briefings in which he's disseminated inaccurate details of an upcoming product's prices or features, then attempts to track down the source of news reports that print the incorrect information.

The Times even recalls a widely publicized case five years ago in which Apple attempted to subpoenaed AppleInsider's Kasper Jade and the PowerPage's Jason O'Grady to force them to identify sources who provided accurate details of an unreleased hardware product code-named Asteroid. The journalists refused to cooperate and instead enlisted the services of the Electronic Frontier Foundation as their counsel.

Eventually, the case went to court with Apple arguing that online journalists shouldn't be afforded the same protections as print journalists. A three-judge panel in the California Court of Appeals ultimately sided unanimously in favor Jade and O'Grady, ruling that they were indeed entitled to the same protections as conventional reporters and would not have to identify their sources. During the proceedings, the court made it clear to Apple that it had no grounds to railroad online reporters into doing their dirty work of uncovering leakers.

Apple declined to appeal and EFF later sued the company for attorney's fees. The court, in an effort to deter Apple from filing future cases of little merit, awarded EFF more than two times the attorney's fees it had asked for, which resulted in Apple paying a $700,000 lump sum that went back into the firm to help defend others who may unjustly come under the heavy hand of big corporations.



For those interested, the development of Asteroid (pictured above) -- a FireWire jam box Apple intended to market alongside its Garage Band software -- was later terminated due to "poor initial execution," according to a person familiar with the matter.

Apple now employs alternative measures in its attempts to keep product plans secret, such as filtering out leakers internally through an in-house information securities division or intentionally misleading Wall Street analysts who, like journalists, attempt to predict the company's next moves in research notes to their paying clients.

Gene Munster, an analyst for Piper Jaffray frequently cited by AppleInsider, told the Times that he often "jokes with other colleagues covering the company about how Apple routinely 'jams the frequencies,' or gives them misinformation to deter them for zeroing in on details of future products or directions it hopes to keep confidential. For example, Munster said that four years ago he was told flat out by an Apple executive that the company saw no interest in developing a budget iPod that lacked a display screen. A few months later, the iPod shuffle was introduced at Macworld Expo.

But Apple's veil of secrecy covers more than just products. It extends to the company's executives, a matter which is now coming under increased scrutiny given recent reports that Steve Jobs underwent a second major surgery without disclosing such information to shareholders who believe he's vital to the continued success of the company and the strength of its share price.

At issue is whether Apple legally sidestepped the responsibility of having to disclose Jobs' recent liver transplant by placing him on leave and shifting the day-to-day responsibilities to chief operating officer Tim Cook.

Some governance experts cited by the Times say that while this may indeed by the case, the fact that Jobs required major surgery such as a liver transplant "now makes one of Apple’s assertions from January — that Mr. Jobs was suffering only from a hormonal imbalance — seem like a deliberate mistruth, unless Mr. Jobs’s health condition suddenly deteriorated."

"Of course, no one knows enough to say definitively," the Times said.
post #2 of 162
yawn, everyone does this

Apple just takes this to an extreme and is more marketing savy than MS

everyone copies everyone, been like this for thousands of years. windows has copied Apple and the iPhone has features originally lifted from PDA's that i've seen 10 years ago. they are just implemented better. it used to piss me off so much that mobile IE of all apps used to not shut down when i told it to on my iPaq and my wife's Axim that we had almost 10 years ago. those were the days, AvantGo was the bomb
post #3 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Some governance experts cited by the Times say that while this may indeed by the case, the fact that Jobs required major surgery such as a liver transplant "now makes one of Apples assertions from January that Mr. Jobs was suffering only from a hormonal imbalance seem like a deliberate mistruth, unless Mr. Jobss health condition suddenly deteriorated."

"

I was disappointed to read this in the NY Times, and even more here in AI. Please, somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but my recollection is that first, Apple said Jobs' weight loss was due to a "hormone imbalance". Then, a few weeks later, they elaborated only a tiny bit and said the problem was "more complex" (than the hormone imbalance). I have no reason to believe that when they said "hormone imbalance" that they knew it was more complex. That sort of confusion followed by more illumination is common for medical problems.

When they realized the problem was more serious, my attitude was that "more complex" was all the detail I needed. At the time I realized it might mean metastasized cancer or something equally serious. Apple also told us it would require six months leave of absence, so it was obviously serious. They told us the truth at the high level, but they didn't tell us any low level details, which we never needed.
post #4 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... the fact that Jobs required major surgery such as a liver transplant "now makes one of Apple’s assertions from January — that Mr. Jobs was suffering only from a hormonal imbalance — seem like a deliberate mistruth, unless Mr. Jobs’s health condition suddenly deteriorated."...

I think this part is inaccurate. It's already been pointed out by some medical professionals that the liver transplant is one way of treating the hormonal after affects of the whipple procedure he had done. It's another misdirection but it's not technically a mistruth.

Apple may be crazy, but they are not dumb.

Edit: and what delreyjones says also. (probably I should have read the thread before commenting)
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #5 of 162
This "veil of secrecy" at Apple has proven to be remarkably effective, particularly with respect to product development and marketing.

The advantages far outweigh the costs.

And as for Steve Jobs' health, Apple is not required by law to disclose sweet f**k all to anyone. Those who are critical of Apple about this are either morally reprehensible themselves or just plain stupid.
post #6 of 162
Secrecy makes Apple products sexier and more exciting.

It would be boring if they lay down their product roadmap like many other companies do.
"Stay hungry, stay foolish."
Reply
"Stay hungry, stay foolish."
Reply
post #7 of 162
With Wall Street's reputation knee-high to an ant, I would say Jobs', and Apple's secrecy is nothing to worry about. Some of us actually purchase Apple products because we like them versus being solely concerned about Apple's stock prices and disclosure.
post #8 of 162
And those testing the most sensitive projects are instructed "to cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

Thats just too far out. I don't believe that at all.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #9 of 162
Idiotic article, quoting exaggerating 'experts' who don't seem to know much about Apple or SJ.

The reporters are obviously ticked-off that Apple doesn't spoon-feed them.
post #10 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by T'hain Esh Kelch View Post

And those testing the most sensitive projects are instructed "to cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

Thats just too far out. I don't believe that at all.

It would make sense if it was a red light *outside* the lab similar to what is used on a sound stage. The worst case scenario for something like this is a person walking through the door while the product is uncovered and a red light of that type would be an excellent indicator.

Anyone notice any suspicious looking light fixtures by doorways in those pictures that were released of Jonny Ive's lab?
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #11 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by T'hain Esh Kelch View Post

And those testing the most sensitive projects are instructed "to cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

Thats just too far out. I don't believe that at all.

I can attest that this is true.

K
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
post #12 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

This "veil of secrecy" at Apple has proven to be remarkably effective, particularly with respect to product development and marketing.

That is exactly right. Apple plays us all like Pavlov's dogs, and makes billions off of the free buzz and advertising. Money couldn't buy the kind of publicity that Apple generates with its products, esp. product launches.

People also don't realize that this is all closely related to reasons why we don't see thriving fan sites named "MicrosoftSecret" or "DellInsider" or "HPRumors" or "ThinkSony." The kind of ecosystem Apple has around it, exemplified by forums like these, is priceless.
post #13 of 162
This is some Mission Impossible shit....

They gotta do, what they gotta do.....ya know.

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply
post #14 of 162
MS has it's own fan websites, Windows Supersite is probably the most famous one. Same thing with the Enterprise products, there is a whole army of MVP's and evangelists who blog about the upcoming features in new products. and a lot of microsoft's devs have their own official MSDN or Channel 9 blogs where they blog about new features or write great technical info to help you with products. MS started this whole trend with it's MVP program back in the 1990's.
post #15 of 162
No big story here- Apple lies and Steve Jobs will eventually die.
post #16 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by delreyjones View Post

I was disappointed to read this in the NY Times, and even more here in AI. Please, somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but my recollection is that first, Apple said Jobs' weight loss was due to a "hormone imbalance". Then, a few weeks later, they elaborated only a tiny bit and said the problem was "more complex" (than the hormone imbalance). I have no reason to believe that when they said "hormone imbalance" that they knew it was more complex.


there are three issues at play here.

1. Steve Jobs is a Cancer survivor. In particular a very harsh form that can reck havoc on the body for years to come in ways not always predictable. At the time they made that statement yes he probably was suffering an imbalance which was affecting his weight etc. So they told the truth. what might have happened later (if the transplant tales are even true) is that he went on leave to deal with it and deal with the stress the press was putting on him and discovered the cause of the imbalance.

2. Steve Jobs is not the end all and be all of Apple. there are other brains at play. this misbelief is part of why he's not the only face at the Keynotes anymore. To try to show the world that there's more chefs in the kitchen. He might be the guy that wrote the recipes but he's not a one man show. Also, technology is not an overnight thing. you can bet that anything they are working on right now is at least 3 years old and they probably have the next 5 years of projects already underway. And everyone knows Steve's vision and what direction he's aiming for. given the success of that vision I can't see them doing a 180 when he leaves

3. Steve Jobs is a person and despite claims otherwise it is possible that Apple is not legally required to tell all about his life. Even with the SEC rules. they do allow for some privacy. Shareholders and Media need to remember this and stop demanding to know all and stop claiming they have a right to it unless they are 100% certain of that claim. And stop destroying the company's stock value over this issue. Focus, as Jobs has clearly been trying to get you to do, on the company's products. The stock going down two dollars cause the new laptops don't have firewire is one thing. Stock going down cause Jobs coughed is just stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

It would make sense if it was a red light *outside* the lab similar to what is used on a sound stage. The worst case scenario for something like this is a person walking through the door while the product is uncovered and a red light of that type would be an excellent indicator.


that is very likely what it is. the light would tell someone "don't bring that visitor into this room" as well as in certain areas "exposed electronics -- don't come in" if it was an area that needed clean room protocols.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #17 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


The Times even recalls a widely publicized case five years ago in which Apple attempted to subpoenaed AppleInsider's Kasper Jade and the PowerPage's Jason O'Grady to force them to identify sources who provided accurate details of an unreleased hardware product code-named Asteroid.

Wait a minute . . . Kaspar Jade is a real person? I always thought that was a
super-secret alias borrowed from an exotic dancer of some kind.

Just kidding. All of you at AI do a fine job, and this is a great article.

The dance of secrecy is one of the main ingredients of "life with Apple" that keeps
us all intrigued and coming back for more. Apple try to keep things secret, little
bits slip out -- some of it's spurious, but there's always just enough real data involved
to keep us on the edge of our seats for the real announcement without ruining
anything.

Apple should pay you a salary for enhancing their launches and making them
that much more exciting!
Journalism is publishing what someone doesn't want us to know; the rest is propaganda.
-Horacio Verbitsky (el perro), journalist (b. 1942)
Reply
Journalism is publishing what someone doesn't want us to know; the rest is propaganda.
-Horacio Verbitsky (el perro), journalist (b. 1942)
Reply
post #18 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

MS has it's own fan websites, Windows Supersite is probably the most famous one.....

If that's their most "famous" fan website, it's a bit sad, really. (Half of their stories seem to be about Apple and Google.)

Btw, a warning if you go to Windows Supersite: Somehow, Bing mysteriusly ends up loading in the background! Typical Microsoft....
post #19 of 162
while I see the financial reasons for maintaining this site, I'm shocked that after being treated so rudely by apple's legal department, this site still refuses to report negatively toward anything about apple.

I GET the fascination with the company, posts like this that show the dark underbelly of what goes on at Apple are really interesting. I'm just shocked that if I ran a site, say, for I dunno, a band I liked, and then the band tried to sue me. I would probably continue the blog, especially if it brought in cash, but I would have a hard time being so blindly postive and, I dunno a better word for it, but I wouldn't be quite as ball-sucking as Apple Insider is at times with it's articles, particularly with reviews and any news having to do with microsoft...

while I expect a favortism toward mac products here, sometimes the apple blinders are up in full force, and it's hard to find an objective point of view.
post #20 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

No big story here... Steve Jobs will eventually die.

Yeah, but when he does there will be those that say "Shit, I didn't see this coming. Why didn't someone tell us - we have been misled again"
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #21 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadisawesome View Post

while I see the financial reasons for maintaining this site, I'm shocked that after being treated so rudely by apple's legal department, this site still refuses to report negatively toward anything about apple.

I GET the fascination with the company, posts like this that show the dark underbelly of what goes on at Apple are really interesting. I'm just shocked that if I ran a site, say, for I dunno, a band I liked, and then the band tried to sue me. I would probably continue the blog, especially if it brought in cash, but I would have a hard time being so blindly postive and, I dunno a better word for it, but I wouldn't be quite as ball-sucking as Apple Insider is at times with it's articles, particularly with reviews and any news having to do with microsoft...

while I expect a favortism toward mac products here, sometimes the apple blinders are up in full force, and it's hard to find an objective point of view.

We have no interest in holding a grudge. That's Apple's MO. But that's also why you'll see Palm Pre ads flanking our articles and not iPhone ads -- Apple refuses to allow us to promote their products through advertisements and has at times intimidated third parties into not placing their ads on AppleInsider as well. While this is an incredible disservice to Apple shareholders, it is what it is.

K
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
post #22 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

And as for Steve Jobs' health, Apple is not required by law to disclose sweet f**k all to anyone. Those who are critical of Apple about this are either morally reprehensible themselves or just plain stupid.

Before you call other people names you should read the NY Times article. You are just plain wrong.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #23 of 162
Lots of companies have to "accidentally" leak future product information to generate a buzz and hope it's high enough to generate sales which will usually fall flat after the initial introduction. Apple - like it or not - does not have to do that. Apple has the general public trained very well.

That being said, this kind of news is getting somewhat old. Even as an AAPL owner, I think the media really needs to move on about Jobs' health. It's a private matter. Be done with it. Apple has continued without his direct involvement and done well. The media sad state today just goes to show that they will go after a dead man if need be to generate news to justify their sorry careers.
post #24 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by T'hain Esh Kelch View Post

And those testing the most sensitive projects are instructed "to cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

Thats just too far out. I don't believe that at all.

That would be incredibly cool!
post #25 of 162
Don't look at what they say, look at what they do. I ignore the rumors and make up my own!

Apple lie constantly, just don't listen to them. Case-in-point: Snow Leopard. I don't believe the speed increases, I will have to actually test it to see it for myself. I will need to posses the OS, to judge properly. In iPhone OS 3.0 Settings takes about 3X longer to open for example. If you ask Apple they would probably lie or give a vague, potentially misleading response. C'est la vie!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #26 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Before you call other people names you should read the NY Times article. You are just plain wrong.

I did.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/te...pple.html?_r=1

And you're entitled to your opinion.

If you're in the habit of assuming people post opinions on subjects they know nothing about, then you might want to apply your measure a bit more selectively.
post #27 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzDots View Post

Yeah, but when he does there will be those that say "Shit, I didn't see this coming. Why didn't someone tell us - we have been misled again"

There will also be those that say "AT&T, dropped calls, firewire, glossy". 3,500 times.
post #28 of 162
I am sure I will upset the Apple fanboys in here but this is wrong. I am an Apple shareholder and Jobs health affects the price of the stock. If he should pass on without warning many people would take a hit in regards to their investment. I do not applaud the manipulation by Apple on this issue. There are laws against this because of the importance of this type of information in regards to a companies value that is so dependent on the presence of one person. Whether there are other people that will adequately run the company or they have great products the passing of Jobs if it happened would negatively affect the stock for a time. I hope for once someone puts Apples feet to the fire on this.
post #29 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

I did.

Apparently either selectively or without full comprehension.

Quote:
And you're entitled to your opinion.

On what? That the company (to use your words) "is not required by law to disclose sweet f**k all to anyone"? This is plainly incorrect.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #30 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizwarrior View Post

I am sure I will upset the Apple fanboys in here but this is wrong. I am an Apple shareholder and Jobs health affects the price of the stock. If he should pass on without warning many people would take a hit in regards to their investment.

That's just tough, IMHO.

It's an assumed risk investors take. That kind of risk is the price of admission.
post #31 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizwarrior View Post

I am sure I will upset the Apple fanboys in here but this is wrong. I am an Apple shareholder and Jobs health affects the price of the stock. If he should pass on without warning many people would take a hit in regards to their investment. I do not applaud the manipulation by Apple on this issue. There are laws against this because of the importance of this type of information in regards to a companies value that is so dependent on the presence of one person. Whether there are other people that will adequately run the company or they have great products the passing of Jobs if it happened would negatively affect the stock for a time. I hope for once someone puts Apples feet to the fire on this.

So then why has the stock risen since he has been gone? Of course it fluctuates, but it has risen overall. And if there are laws, why has no one stepped in?
post #32 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

That's just tough, IMHO.

It's an assumed risk investors take. That kind of risk is the price of admission.

An investor is supposed to have the facts. They are not suppose to be put at risk by a company putting out false information.
post #33 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

No big story here- Apple lies and Steve Jobs will eventually die.

That is true, eventually every one dies including you. But the difference is what they have achieved before they die. What have you done that is good for the world?

Also there is difference between lies and not giving the information you do not have to give. If one is lying to extract money from you, that is different from telling something to protect yourself. I think your thoughts are far fetched and IDIOTIC!!
post #34 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizwarrior View Post

An investor is supposed to have the facts. They are not suppose to be put at risk by a company putting out false information.

"Facts" about a company's growth, finances, results, and other infrmation that requires disclosure is different form "Facts" about an executive's personal health or what colour his most recent stool sample was.
post #35 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

So then why has the stock risen since he has been gone? Of course it fluctuates, but it has risen overall. And if there are laws, why has no one stepped in?

Why did they not step in on Madoff? The SEC does not get around to stepping in adequatlly most of the time. If this is not important why play with the truth, let the market decide if it is important or not. Respected analyst believe that Jobs passing could cause the stock to drop by 20 percent or more. I am in that camp would like to be able to get out of the stock if he was gravely ill.
post #36 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

"Facts" about a company's growth, finances, results, and other infrmation that requires disclosure is different form "Facts" about an executive's personal health or what colour his most recent stool sample was.

I respectfully disagree, it is different when you have a brand like Jobs so intertwined in the value of a company.
post #37 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizwarrior View Post

I am sure I will upset the Apple fanboys in here but this is wrong. I am an Apple shareholder and Jobs health affects the price of the stock. If he should pass on without warning many people would take a hit in regards to their investment. I do not applaud the manipulation by Apple on this issue. There are laws against this because of the importance of this type of information in regards to a companies value that is so dependent on the presence of one person. Whether there are other people that will adequately run the company or they have great products the passing of Jobs if it happened would negatively affect the stock for a time. I hope for once someone puts Apples feet to the fire on this.

Just because you hold stock doesn't mean sh!t. Anytime you own stock, you are taking your chances. You are basically gambling. You don't get to see the cards the blackjack dealer is holding so why do you think you get to know some corporations executive's blood-test results.

Your entitlement as it relates to a buck is kind of gross.
"Some of us are decent people who want to stay out of the emergency room, but still
blast through neo-gridlock traffic in residential districts whenever we feel like it....
For that we need fine...
Reply
"Some of us are decent people who want to stay out of the emergency room, but still
blast through neo-gridlock traffic in residential districts whenever we feel like it....
For that we need fine...
Reply
post #38 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

That's just tough, IMHO.

It's an assumed risk investors take. That kind of risk is the price of admission.

No, it is not. The company must follow SEC rules on the disclosure of material events. This is not optional. Apple is clearly attempting to skirt these rules where the ability of Steve Jobs to remain in his position is concerned. As the article says, we don't know how by how much they are attempting to skirt the rules because of the wall of secrecy. So it's a deliberately created Catch-22 situation for investors, which sadly, is an invitation to a lawsuit.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #39 of 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizwarrior View Post

I respectfully disagree, it is different when you have a brand like Jobs so intertwined in the value of a company.

Ok, but you can' t go around applying the law selectively (not that it really applies to health issue disclosures, anyway) just because Apple users, fans, and the media have accorded Steve Jobs an inordinate amount of star-power.
post #40 of 162
Loose Lips Sink Ships. Remember this, always
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Report details Apple's unusual veil of secrecy