Being the CEO of Apple isn't 6th grade PE. You can't call in sick. That was a pretty idiotic statement. Of course he is really sick, the hope, is that he is doing better.
Apologies if you were genuinely offended. Otherwise, lighten up, and realize that not everything written here is intended to be taken seriously.
An ios device unveiling (especially the iPad) without SJ is certainly more that just a media event. Like it or not AAPL is effected in very real terms according to these events.
Steve Jobs is not dead! Why would he not attend this release, assuming he is mobile? I know he is a private person, but there is no reason why he should hide himself away. I think he has a lot more courage than that.
Well if Apple wants to promote FaceTime, I can't think of any better way to do it.
I could! 1) Open the standard like they said they would. 2) offer a free Mac and Windows client. 3) come up with a compelling argument why non mac/iphone peole should adopt it over Skype and other options. 4) come up with a compelling argument for why people who have turned from voice to text to reverse direction and go to voice and video calling.
9 months in I would have to rate Facetime a pretty big dissapointment so far. It is below my expectations and my expectations were pretty darn low to begin with.
An ios device unveiling (especially the iPad) without SJ is certainly more that just a media event. Like it or not AAPL is effected in very real terms according to these events.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
I think you can agree that SJ with all he has done for Apple deserves a little time to see about his health before making plans for his future. I don't think anyone is living in a false reality, they are simply waiting for SJ to get healthy, or determine that he won't ever be healthy enough to return. Again, he has earned the right to take his time away and see what happens.
I could! 1) Open the standard like they said they would. 2) offer a free Mac and Windows client. 3) come up with a compelling argument why non mac/iphone peole should adopt it over Skype and other options. 4) come up with a compelling argument for why people who have turned from voice to text to reverse direction and go to voice and video calling.
9 months in I would have to rate Facetime a pretty big dissapointment so far. It is below my expectations and my expectations were pretty darn low to begin with.
Of course they're not going to open FaceTime up until it's established on the iPad (!).
I would have to rate your comment pretty high, though. You never seem to disappoint.
I think you can agree that SJ with all he has done for Apple deserves a little time to see about his health before making plans for his future. I don't think anyone is living in a false reality, they are simply waiting for SJ to get healthy, or determine that he won't ever be healthy enough to return. Again, he has earned the right to take his time away and see what happens.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
He was also spotted at California's Stanford Cancer Center.
Everybody just assumes this means he was there for cancer treatment. He could just as easily been there because Apple (and other companies) are donating money to Stanford Medical Center for new high tech facilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j1h15233
If they wanted to make the biggest splash possible, then they would secretly get Steve there (easier said than done), have him call via Facetime, and then have him say "one more thing" as he hangs up and walks out to meet the crowd and presents the real "one more thing". And BOOM goes the dynamite haha.
I love it. Now that would be cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77
Of course he's going to be there. It's his baby, and it's the future of computing. There's no way he's going to miss it.
Sort of what i figure too. If he's not, i'd really worry about what that implies about his health. Then again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by judge87
While I do think it's a good gimmick I ultimately believe this will end up hurting Apple's stock. His appearance will make people think that apple can't work without him. If he appears unwell analysts will get worried however really no matter how he looks people will get spooked.
Yeah, this is my fear too. AAPL is really at the mercy of superstitious and ignorant people. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
So i guess it really doesn't matter, as far as AAPL price is concerned, if Steve shows up or not. Stock is down today, when it should have been up. (Price of oil must have gone up today, trumping anticipation of iPad2.) AAPL will be up for a little tomorrow before the event (unless Libya implodes), but will be down after the iPad announcement, no matter how well it goes. \
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcahill009
Being the CEO of Apple isn't 6th grade PE. You can't call in sick. That was a pretty idiotic statement. Of course he is really sick, the hope, is that he is doing better.
Lighten up. It was a joke. I doubt any disrespect toward Steve was intended.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
Not necessarily true which is why stockholders voted down making the succession plan public. There should always be a succession plan, but making it public has all sorts of downsides. You are signalling your intentions to competition, you are telling your top guys who are not the choice to jump ship and go somewhere they may have a better shot, etc. All Apple needs to do is tell the public that if the need for a new CEO arises they will be prepared.
How many of the next CEO's of the Fortune 500 can you name? There are a handful that have gone public with their plans, but I bet you can't name 10%. There is no reason why Apple should be any different.
Apple really needs to find a new Face and or Spokeman.
We all know that S. Jobs' days of being that are probably over with.
Out of all the bunch, I think Scott Forstall would be the best candidate.
Of course the other guys can do some of the presenting.
But at least for a couple of years, they need to have a New Main Guy.
I also thought this when I first saw Scott Forstall. However, both him, Jonathan Ives, and Phil Schiller need to work on their "It's awesome" salesman routine. Steve has that down pat, and manages to inject sincerity into his presentation which people buy into.
With those other guys, I can only hear "awesome wonderful exciting" etc so many times before I start to get that sickly feeling, sort of like Alex in Clockwork Orange. There is a mashup on YouTube showing the Apple sales pitches during their keynotes and presentations and it is quite humorous once you see the larger picture of what they are trying to do and the language they use.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality. [/url]
But they did vote on it: They said No. Not to a succession plan, which they already have, but to publicly disclosing it. That was probably a very wise move too.
Excerpt from the Notice Of 2011 Annual Meeting Of Shareholders:
Quote:
The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST Proposal No. 5.
The Company recognizes that a highly talented and experienced management team, not just the CEO, is critical to Apple?s success. Accordingly, the Board already implements many of the proposed actions and maintains a comprehensive succession plan throughout the organization. While the Board strongly supports the concept of succession planning, it recommends a vote against Proposal No. 5 for the following reasons.
As noted, the Company already fulfills several of the requests proposed. The Company?s Corporate Governance Guidelines, available publicly on the Company?s website, require the Board and CEO to conduct an annual review of succession planning for senior management, including the CEO. As part of this annual review, the Board has a formal evaluation process in which it identifies and recommends development of internal candidates for succession based on criteria that reflect Apple?s business strategy.
Furthermore, adopting Proposal No. 5 would give the Company?s competitors an unfair advantage. Proposal No. 5 would publicize the Company?s confidential objectives and plans. Giving competitors access to this information is not in the best interest of the Company or its shareholders.
Proposal No. 5 would also undermine the Company?s efforts to recruit and retain executives. The Board believes that the Company?s success depends on attracting and retaining a superior executive team, including the CEO. Proposal No. 5 requires a report identifying the candidates being considered for CEO, as well as the criteria used to evaluate each candidate. By publicly naming these potential successors, Proposal No. 5 invites competitors to recruit high-value executives away from Apple. Furthermore, executives who are not identified as potential successors may choose to voluntarily leave the Company.
Proposal No. 5 attempts to micro-manage and constrain the actions of the Board. In practice, the Board and the management of the Company are best equipped to carry out succession planning, as well as to handle day-to-day hiring, promotion and termination decisions. Such decisions take into consideration numerous criteria that are continually adapted to meet the evolving demands of the Company and should not be constrained by arbitrary rules such as the three-year ?non-emergency CEO succession planning? in Proposal No. 5. The Company takes succession planning seriously, and the Board has adopted a comprehensive process to ensure continuity and maintain the superior quality of its management team. This process also allows flexibility to adjust to unanticipated changes in the market. As such, the Company is already substantially fulfilling the request in Proposal No. 5, and the Board recommends a vote against Proposal No. 5.
If the proposal had actually passed, it likely would have been challenged in court and struck down, because shareholders aren't supposed to micro-manage.
Apple really needs to find a new Face and or Spokeman? Out of all the bunch, I think Scott Forstall would be the best candidate.
Are you being sarcastic? Is that twisted humor or something? Scott Forstall gives me the the creeps. I wish Apple would hide him away in the basement or someplace. Every time he gets up on stage, chills run up and down my spine. Literally!
Tim Cook, on the other hand, has a very warm, pleasant personality.
Are you being sarcastic? Is that twisted humor or something? Scott Forstall gives me the the creeps. I wish Apple would hide him away in the basement or someplace. Every time he gets up on stage, chills run up and down my spine. Literally!
Tim Cook, on the other hand, has a very warm, pleasant personality.
Come on, that's a bit harsh. He'll get better; he's just nervous, and you're not helping by saying that. He seems to be a decent sort overall.
But have to agree that Tim Cook has great presence.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
They just don't feel the need to let you know about it. Telling the shareholders is the same as telling the public. Unnecessary, the owners don't run the company, hired management does. If they feel that management is doing a bad job, they can fire them.
I think the arguement is that by only doing a cameo via facetime, he would be making the statement that the "underlings" can handle the company moving forward, but that he is still overseeing (or at least a part of) big project while he is away. This would show the most stability within Apple IMO.
On the other hand, if the "one more thing" was that Steve is healthy and back full time, that wouldn't be a bad thing either.
My concern with any appearance by Jobs is that that will become the news rather then the new iPads. Apple likes to make sure the spotlight is on the products they announce.
Comments
-kpluck
Being the CEO of Apple isn't 6th grade PE. You can't call in sick. That was a pretty idiotic statement. Of course he is really sick, the hope, is that he is doing better.
Apologies if you were genuinely offended. Otherwise, lighten up, and realize that not everything written here is intended to be taken seriously.
An ios device unveiling (especially the iPad) without SJ is certainly more that just a media event. Like it or not AAPL is effected in very real terms according to these events.
Steve Jobs is not dead! Why would he not attend this release, assuming he is mobile? I know he is a private person, but there is no reason why he should hide himself away. I think he has a lot more courage than that.
Well if Apple wants to promote FaceTime, I can't think of any better way to do it.
I could! 1) Open the standard like they said they would. 2) offer a free Mac and Windows client. 3) come up with a compelling argument why non mac/iphone peole should adopt it over Skype and other options. 4) come up with a compelling argument for why people who have turned from voice to text to reverse direction and go to voice and video calling.
9 months in I would have to rate Facetime a pretty big dissapointment so far. It is below my expectations and my expectations were pretty darn low to begin with.
An ios device unveiling (especially the iPad) without SJ is certainly more that just a media event. Like it or not AAPL is effected in very real terms according to these events.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...23-715840.html
-kpluck
That was disrespectful, but, I do have a weakness for irony/humour.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...23-715840.html
I'm sorry. I understood there was an unpublished succession plan.
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...23-715840.html
I think you can agree that SJ with all he has done for Apple deserves a little time to see about his health before making plans for his future. I don't think anyone is living in a false reality, they are simply waiting for SJ to get healthy, or determine that he won't ever be healthy enough to return. Again, he has earned the right to take his time away and see what happens.
We all know that S. Jobs' days of being that are probably over with.
Out of all the bunch, I think Scott Forstall would be the best candidate.
Of course the other guys can do some of the presenting.
But at least for a couple of years, they need to have a New Main Guy.
I could! 1) Open the standard like they said they would. 2) offer a free Mac and Windows client. 3) come up with a compelling argument why non mac/iphone peole should adopt it over Skype and other options. 4) come up with a compelling argument for why people who have turned from voice to text to reverse direction and go to voice and video calling.
9 months in I would have to rate Facetime a pretty big dissapointment so far. It is below my expectations and my expectations were pretty darn low to begin with.
Of course they're not going to open FaceTime up until it's established on the iPad (!).
I would have to rate your comment pretty high, though. You never seem to disappoint.
I think you can agree that SJ with all he has done for Apple deserves a little time to see about his health before making plans for his future. I don't think anyone is living in a false reality, they are simply waiting for SJ to get healthy, or determine that he won't ever be healthy enough to return. Again, he has earned the right to take his time away and see what happens.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
He was also spotted at California's Stanford Cancer Center.
Everybody just assumes this means he was there for cancer treatment. He could just as easily been there because Apple (and other companies) are donating money to Stanford Medical Center for new high tech facilities.
If they wanted to make the biggest splash possible, then they would secretly get Steve there (easier said than done), have him call via Facetime, and then have him say "one more thing" as he hangs up and walks out to meet the crowd and presents the real "one more thing". And BOOM goes the dynamite haha.
I love it. Now that would be cool.
Of course he's going to be there. It's his baby, and it's the future of computing. There's no way he's going to miss it.
Sort of what i figure too. If he's not, i'd really worry about what that implies about his health. Then again:
While I do think it's a good gimmick I ultimately believe this will end up hurting Apple's stock. His appearance will make people think that apple can't work without him. If he appears unwell analysts will get worried however really no matter how he looks people will get spooked.
Yeah, this is my fear too. AAPL is really at the mercy of superstitious and ignorant people. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
So i guess it really doesn't matter, as far as AAPL price is concerned, if Steve shows up or not. Stock is down today, when it should have been up. (Price of oil must have gone up today, trumping anticipation of iPad2.) AAPL will be up for a little tomorrow before the event (unless Libya implodes), but will be down after the iPad announcement, no matter how well it goes.
Being the CEO of Apple isn't 6th grade PE. You can't call in sick. That was a pretty idiotic statement. Of course he is really sick, the hope, is that he is doing better.
Lighten up. It was a joke. I doubt any disrespect toward Steve was intended.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
Not necessarily true which is why stockholders voted down making the succession plan public. There should always be a succession plan, but making it public has all sorts of downsides. You are signalling your intentions to competition, you are telling your top guys who are not the choice to jump ship and go somewhere they may have a better shot, etc. All Apple needs to do is tell the public that if the need for a new CEO arises they will be prepared.
How many of the next CEO's of the Fortune 500 can you name? There are a handful that have gone public with their plans, but I bet you can't name 10%. There is no reason why Apple should be any different.
Apple really needs to find a new Face and or Spokeman.
We all know that S. Jobs' days of being that are probably over with.
Out of all the bunch, I think Scott Forstall would be the best candidate.
Of course the other guys can do some of the presenting.
But at least for a couple of years, they need to have a New Main Guy.
I also thought this when I first saw Scott Forstall. However, both him, Jonathan Ives, and Phil Schiller need to work on their "It's awesome" salesman routine. Steve has that down pat, and manages to inject sincerity into his presentation which people buy into.
With those other guys, I can only hear "awesome wonderful exciting" etc so many times before I start to get that sickly feeling, sort of like Alex in Clockwork Orange. There is a mashup on YouTube showing the Apple sales pitches during their keynotes and presentations and it is quite humorous once you see the larger picture of what they are trying to do and the language they use.
Edit: Here is that video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx7v815bYUw
Well Apple can't even vote on a succession plan. Like it or not Steve Jobs may never come back in good health so the company needs to move forward and not live in a false reality. [/url]
But they did vote on it: They said No. Not to a succession plan, which they already have, but to publicly disclosing it. That was probably a very wise move too.
Excerpt from the Notice Of 2011 Annual Meeting Of Shareholders:
The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST Proposal No. 5.
The Company recognizes that a highly talented and experienced management team, not just the CEO, is critical to Apple?s success. Accordingly, the Board already implements many of the proposed actions and maintains a comprehensive succession plan throughout the organization. While the Board strongly supports the concept of succession planning, it recommends a vote against Proposal No. 5 for the following reasons.
As noted, the Company already fulfills several of the requests proposed. The Company?s Corporate Governance Guidelines, available publicly on the Company?s website, require the Board and CEO to conduct an annual review of succession planning for senior management, including the CEO. As part of this annual review, the Board has a formal evaluation process in which it identifies and recommends development of internal candidates for succession based on criteria that reflect Apple?s business strategy.
Furthermore, adopting Proposal No. 5 would give the Company?s competitors an unfair advantage. Proposal No. 5 would publicize the Company?s confidential objectives and plans. Giving competitors access to this information is not in the best interest of the Company or its shareholders.
Proposal No. 5 would also undermine the Company?s efforts to recruit and retain executives. The Board believes that the Company?s success depends on attracting and retaining a superior executive team, including the CEO. Proposal No. 5 requires a report identifying the candidates being considered for CEO, as well as the criteria used to evaluate each candidate. By publicly naming these potential successors, Proposal No. 5 invites competitors to recruit high-value executives away from Apple. Furthermore, executives who are not identified as potential successors may choose to voluntarily leave the Company.
Proposal No. 5 attempts to micro-manage and constrain the actions of the Board. In practice, the Board and the management of the Company are best equipped to carry out succession planning, as well as to handle day-to-day hiring, promotion and termination decisions. Such decisions take into consideration numerous criteria that are continually adapted to meet the evolving demands of the Company and should not be constrained by arbitrary rules such as the three-year ?non-emergency CEO succession planning? in Proposal No. 5. The Company takes succession planning seriously, and the Board has adopted a comprehensive process to ensure continuity and maintain the superior quality of its management team. This process also allows flexibility to adjust to unanticipated changes in the market. As such, the Company is already substantially fulfilling the request in Proposal No. 5, and the Board recommends a vote against Proposal No. 5.
If the proposal had actually passed, it likely would have been challenged in court and struck down, because shareholders aren't supposed to micro-manage.
Apple really needs to find a new Face and or Spokeman? Out of all the bunch, I think Scott Forstall would be the best candidate.
Are you being sarcastic? Is that twisted humor or something? Scott Forstall gives me the the creeps.
Tim Cook, on the other hand, has a very warm, pleasant personality.
Steve could always make an appearance via FaceTime. That would be very apropos for the event.
Yes, but then all the detractors (you know who you are, extremeskater) will be criticizing him for just phoning it in.
Are you being sarcastic? Is that twisted humor or something? Scott Forstall gives me the the creeps.
Tim Cook, on the other hand, has a very warm, pleasant personality.
Come on, that's a bit harsh. He'll get better; he's just nervous, and you're not helping by saying that. He seems to be a decent sort overall.
But have to agree that Tim Cook has great presence.
Why would a company the size of Apple wait? A plan is in place in case the worst happens. In any situation like this you hope for the best but you have to plan for the worst.
People often talk about shareholder and the stock price well the worse thing you could do for the stock is create uncertainty
They just don't feel the need to let you know about it. Telling the shareholders is the same as telling the public. Unnecessary, the owners don't run the company, hired management does. If they feel that management is doing a bad job, they can fire them.
I think the arguement is that by only doing a cameo via facetime, he would be making the statement that the "underlings" can handle the company moving forward, but that he is still overseeing (or at least a part of) big project while he is away. This would show the most stability within Apple IMO.
On the other hand, if the "one more thing" was that Steve is healthy and back full time, that wouldn't be a bad thing either.
My concern with any appearance by Jobs is that that will become the news rather then the new iPads. Apple likes to make sure the spotlight is on the products they announce.