You think that this is helping Apple? Do you think going after Martha Stewart helped her company?
This isn't helping Apple. This is helping shareholders. If shareholders can't be assured that they're buying and selling on accurate information, the whole system falls apart.
On that note, I have a company. I make 5 trillion dollars in profits. Every day. It's right here in my quarterly report. Certainly, I would never forge any figures, or make anything up. Wanna buy some stock?
The gripe here is that the SEC goes after activities that might cause damages worth $millions but doesn't go after those whose malfeasance has caused $billions of damage.
The source of those allegations is some unnamed columnist, hardly awe inspiring. Also, Jobs may have benefited from options backdating WHICH IS NOT ILLEGAL, just that it has to be properly accounted for in the quarterly report to the shareholders, and that is the CFO's responsibility, not the CEO's.
I sincerely do mean to be calling names here, but I am afraid your ignorance is a bit stunning.
1) The columnist is Graef Crystal, who, btw, is liberally named in the article, but I suppose you didn't get past the headline. He is one of the top executive compensation (and more generally, corporate governance) experts anywhere in the world. (I am not going to do your homework for you by giving you a link to his bio. Why don't you just google his name, and take it from there.)
2) The legality of backdating is not for you to assert or decide; regulators and courts will decide that. But I can tell you that, regardless of the legality, it stinks of unethical self-dealing. Heck, forget ethics. Most importantly, allowing this type of self-dealing severs the biggest supposed incentive that options were supposed to provide, which is to align the interests of managers and shareholders: If managers can give themselves a set of benefits that are delinked from the share price at the time of grant (e.g., backdating, options re-loading, re-setting the exercise price, etc.) then they have little incentive to worry about the share price. (I suggest you check out, for starters, some superb work done on this by Bebchuk and Fried of the Harvard Law School, see here: http://www.pay-without-performance.com/).
3) The CEO has no responsibility for the quarterly report? Wow. Just tell that to the jurors who convicted Lay and Skilling (and the judge who handed down the sentence). In the meantime you may want to learn a little bit about the CEO financial statement certification requirements under Section 302 the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (go to the SEC's website and browse).
And, the by the way, the story you cited is headlined "Jobs knew; apologizes" (An earlier post seemed to imply that Jobs had no knowldege, and that it was just the corporate lawyer and the CFO).
He did admit to knowing about it, but claimed that he didn't know that it might be considered shady activity.
This isn't helping Apple. This is helping shareholders. If shareholders can't be assured that they're buying and selling on accurate information, the whole system falls apart.
Touche!
Quote:
On that note, I have a company. I make 5 trillion dollars in profits. Every day. It's right here in my quarterly report. Certainly, I would never forge any figures, or make anything up. Wanna buy some stock?
Oh yes, and Steve Jobs must be on this too with Wu et. al, by switching lawyers, etc on cue before the end of Dec., so as to make the short sellers rich.
Man, this is amazing naivete!!!!!!
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
Really? Do I need the SEC to tell me that would be a bad investment?
Again, since Apple's shares have fallen, how is the SEC's activity helping Apple shareholders?
A long term help may mean a short term pain. Like a prick of a tetanus shot vs. getting the disease. If the SEC doesn't aggressively pursue fraud then the shareholders will eventually be hurt when it happens again.
How does jailing a murderer help the victim's family? Does it bring the victim back to life?
No. It helps to prevent further murders.
Your analogy doesn't make sense. If Apple's shares drop on news of the investigation, then its fairly clear that the investigation is hurting Apple's shares more than the backdating of the options (or not reporting that properly). Isn't this a sign that people are more afraid of the SEC than they are of the alleged malfeasors?
A better analogy would be if the police went around breaking down doors and beating up people just in case they might be committing murders. People would be more afraid of the police than they are of any actually murderers.
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
We all knew there was some shit in the Apple to get out of the way. Here it is! As per usual WS will make it sound AS BIG A SHIT as possible. And include a nice tree shake or two to scare away any number of weak PI's. When this shit is out of the way and their clinets have loaded up below $80. The WS street (in other words con-artists) will the switch message and will hype up the possitive news flow - beyond reality to $100+
I'm a bit miffed I missed $78 I thought it was going down on 29th which is the deadline for the restatement methinks. Ah well perhaps it will dip again!
It makes you sound like another mindless Apple apologist, but go ahead.
I really don't see what the problem with the previous statement was. Apple stock dipped on misleading stories of a slide in iTunes sales. More often than not, I've seen Apple shares drop just after they post healthy profits. They often hit close to the upper end their own guidance, but they don't always hit unrealistic targets set by outsiders, so the price drops.
I think investors would do good to not jump ship the instant there is a known ice cube in the water but the Register or some other outlet calls it an iceberg.
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
If Apple's shares drop on news of the investigation, then its fairly clear that the investigation is hurting Apple's shares more than the backdating of the options (or not reporting that properly). Isn't this a sign that people are more afraid of the SEC than they are of the alleged malfeasors?
A better analogy would be if the police went around breaking down doors and beating up people just in case they might be committing murders. People would be more afraid of the police than they are of any actually murderers.
Because if Apple were allowed to go around forging documents and statements all the time, then investors have absolutely no idea how Apple is performing.
Punishments don't occur to "undo" crimes. They exist to prevent future ones.
Apple already lied to shareholders. This 5% drop is nothing?it's likely negligible to a long term holder. Apple being accountable to accurately disclose their performance is immeasurably important for not only Apple shareholders, but to the stock market, and the entire economy of the United States.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
Good summary. The stock was driven down by excessive selling with no real change in fundamentals. The SJ story was the final nail. I own over 1600 shares and keep buying as it takes dips like this. I am not a day or options trader so I don't lose money when it goes down like this. I am riding it out and laughing all the way to the bank.
Because if Apple were allowed to go around forging documents and statements all the time, then investors have absolutely no idea how Apple is performing.
Punishments don't occur to "undo" crimes. They exist to prevent future ones.
Apple already lied to shareholders. This 5% drop is nothing?it's likely negligible to a long term holder. Apple being accountable to accurately disclose their performance is immeasurably important for not only Apple shareholders, but to the stock market, and the entire economy of the United States.
After our little battle over iPods you might find this hard to believe, but, I agree with you. All metrics of valuing stocks and companies are based on accurate and reliable reports that companies must file with the SEC. Without it, we might as well be the Russian stock exchange.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
Call me cynical but I believe this info was know by some wall street insiders, hedge fund traders or big institutional investors and they drove the stock down. Sure it's against the law but laws get broken every day.
Call me cynical but I believe this info was know by some wall street insiders, hedge fund traders or big institutional investors and they drove the stock down. Sure it's against the law but laws get broken every day.
Comments
You think that this is helping Apple? Do you think going after Martha Stewart helped her company?
This isn't helping Apple. This is helping shareholders. If shareholders can't be assured that they're buying and selling on accurate information, the whole system falls apart.
On that note, I have a company. I make 5 trillion dollars in profits. Every day. It's right here in my quarterly report. Certainly, I would never forge any figures, or make anything up. Wanna buy some stock?
The source of those allegations is some unnamed columnist, hardly awe inspiring. Also, Jobs may have benefited from options backdating WHICH IS NOT ILLEGAL, just that it has to be properly accounted for in the quarterly report to the shareholders, and that is the CFO's responsibility, not the CEO's.
I sincerely do mean to be calling names here, but I am afraid your ignorance is a bit stunning.
1) The columnist is Graef Crystal, who, btw, is liberally named in the article, but I suppose you didn't get past the headline. He is one of the top executive compensation (and more generally, corporate governance) experts anywhere in the world. (I am not going to do your homework for you by giving you a link to his bio. Why don't you just google his name, and take it from there.)
2) The legality of backdating is not for you to assert or decide; regulators and courts will decide that. But I can tell you that, regardless of the legality, it stinks of unethical self-dealing. Heck, forget ethics. Most importantly, allowing this type of self-dealing severs the biggest supposed incentive that options were supposed to provide, which is to align the interests of managers and shareholders: If managers can give themselves a set of benefits that are delinked from the share price at the time of grant (e.g., backdating, options re-loading, re-setting the exercise price, etc.) then they have little incentive to worry about the share price. (I suggest you check out, for starters, some superb work done on this by Bebchuk and Fried of the Harvard Law School, see here: http://www.pay-without-performance.com/).
3) The CEO has no responsibility for the quarterly report? Wow. Just tell that to the jurors who convicted Lay and Skilling (and the judge who handed down the sentence). In the meantime you may want to learn a little bit about the CEO financial statement certification requirements under Section 302 the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (go to the SEC's website and browse).
And, the by the way, the story you cited is headlined "Jobs knew; apologizes" (An earlier post seemed to imply that Jobs had no knowldege, and that it was just the corporate lawyer and the CFO).
He did admit to knowing about it, but claimed that he didn't know that it might be considered shady activity.
This isn't helping Apple. This is helping shareholders. If shareholders can't be assured that they're buying and selling on accurate information, the whole system falls apart.
Touche!
On that note, I have a company. I make 5 trillion dollars in profits. Every day. It's right here in my quarterly report. Certainly, I would never forge any figures, or make anything up. Wanna buy some stock?
Touche!
Really? Do I need the SEC to tell me that would be a bad investment?
Again, since Apple's shares have fallen, how is the SEC's activity helping Apple shareholders?
Oh yes, and Steve Jobs must be on this too with Wu et. al, by switching lawyers, etc on cue before the end of Dec., so as to make the short sellers rich.
Man, this is amazing naivete!!!!!!
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
Really? Do I need the SEC to tell me that would be a bad investment?
Again, since Apple's shares have fallen, how is the SEC's activity helping Apple shareholders?
A long term help may mean a short term pain. Like a prick of a tetanus shot vs. getting the disease. If the SEC doesn't aggressively pursue fraud then the shareholders will eventually be hurt when it happens again.
Really? Do I need the SEC to tell me that would be a bad investment?
Again, since Apple's shares have fallen, how is the SEC's activity helping Apple shareholders?
How does jailing a murderer help the victim's family? Does it bring the victim back to life?
No. It helps to prevent further murders.
How does jailing a murderer help the victim's family? Does it bring the victim back to life?
No. It helps to prevent further murders.
Your analogy doesn't make sense. If Apple's shares drop on news of the investigation, then its fairly clear that the investigation is hurting Apple's shares more than the backdating of the options (or not reporting that properly). Isn't this a sign that people are more afraid of the SEC than they are of the alleged malfeasors?
A better analogy would be if the police went around breaking down doors and beating up people just in case they might be committing murders. People would be more afraid of the police than they are of any actually murderers.
I sincerely do mean to be calling names here........
My apologies!!!!! A "not" was missing in that sentence.
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
We all knew there was some shit in the Apple to get out of the way. Here it is! As per usual WS will make it sound AS BIG A SHIT as possible. And include a nice tree shake or two to scare away any number of weak PI's. When this shit is out of the way and their clinets have loaded up below $80. The WS street (in other words con-artists) will the switch message and will hype up the possitive news flow - beyond reality to $100+
I'm a bit miffed I missed $78 I thought it was going down on 29th which is the deadline for the restatement methinks. Ah well perhaps it will dip again!
It makes you sound like another mindless Apple apologist, but go ahead.
I really don't see what the problem with the previous statement was. Apple stock dipped on misleading stories of a slide in iTunes sales. More often than not, I've seen Apple shares drop just after they post healthy profits. They often hit close to the upper end their own guidance, but they don't always hit unrealistic targets set by outsiders, so the price drops.
I think investors would do good to not jump ship the instant there is a known ice cube in the water but the Register or some other outlet calls it an iceberg.
So you are telling me that Wall street has very good reason for AAPL to go down 17 points from its high all because Steve switched lawyers? Give me a break.
These guys (not Steve at point) make millions in manipulating the stock. Cramer had a pretty good explanation of hedge fund managers doing exactly what you think is naivete on my part. They leak stories to drive the stock down and creat buying opportunities. The whole year was like this for aapl. Positive stories would come out via rumors and the stock shot up. They negative stories came out and the stock dived back in July.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
Your analogy doesn't make sense.
Maybe not to stupid people.
If Apple's shares drop on news of the investigation, then its fairly clear that the investigation is hurting Apple's shares more than the backdating of the options (or not reporting that properly). Isn't this a sign that people are more afraid of the SEC than they are of the alleged malfeasors?
A better analogy would be if the police went around breaking down doors and beating up people just in case they might be committing murders. People would be more afraid of the police than they are of any actually murderers.
Because if Apple were allowed to go around forging documents and statements all the time, then investors have absolutely no idea how Apple is performing.
Punishments don't occur to "undo" crimes. They exist to prevent future ones.
Apple already lied to shareholders. This 5% drop is nothing?it's likely negligible to a long term holder. Apple being accountable to accurately disclose their performance is immeasurably important for not only Apple shareholders, but to the stock market, and the entire economy of the United States.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
Good summary. The stock was driven down by excessive selling with no real change in fundamentals. The SJ story was the final nail. I own over 1600 shares and keep buying as it takes dips like this. I am not a day or options trader so I don't lose money when it goes down like this. I am riding it out and laughing all the way to the bank.
That's really too bad. This is another witch hunt by the securities regulators. Isn't their job supposed to be to protect shareholders?.
It's not my area of expertise but I think their job is to see that securites laws are not violated. Indirectly that should help investors.
Maybe not to stupid people.
Because if Apple were allowed to go around forging documents and statements all the time, then investors have absolutely no idea how Apple is performing.
Punishments don't occur to "undo" crimes. They exist to prevent future ones.
Apple already lied to shareholders. This 5% drop is nothing?it's likely negligible to a long term holder. Apple being accountable to accurately disclose their performance is immeasurably important for not only Apple shareholders, but to the stock market, and the entire economy of the United States.
After our little battle over iPods you might find this hard to believe, but, I agree with you. All metrics of valuing stocks and companies are based on accurate and reliable reports that companies must file with the SEC. Without it, we might as well be the Russian stock exchange.
1) AAPL did not go down 17 points because Steve Jobs switched lawyers or hedge funds leaked info; it went down a few points between yesterday and today because law.com, AI, etc reported a story that the market got very worried about (the price is almost back to where it was yseterday). Perhaps you are not a conspiracy theorist, and sites such as law.com and AI are in fact fronts for hedge funds.
2) AAPL zoomed to, and fell from 93+ over the past few weeks, having to do with rumors over the iPhone (or iTalk for iWhatever), iPod Shuffle, iTunes Store, etc. For instance, I vaguely recall that a badly researched report (put out by Forrester?) on the iTunes music store sales falling led to a massive decline a couple of weeks ago. (Again, perhaps you are not a conspiracy buff, and maybe they too are a front for a hedge fund).
3) Is it possible, based on fundamentals, that $93 is not the right price, but rather $80 is? In any event, at the P/E's at which AAPL is trading, this is the type of volatility you should expect to live with.
4) Even if all your conspiracy theories about hedge funds were true, there is no reason why you should not ride their coattails even as a "naive" investor, and profit -- for instance, you could easily have made five bucks today! (Granted, shorting is difficult to do).
5) Hedge funds attempting this sort of thing -- and I have no doubt that some of them try -- risk being put out of business by the SEC (referring to another post on why we need the SEC).
Call me cynical but I believe this info was know by some wall street insiders, hedge fund traders or big institutional investors and they drove the stock down. Sure it's against the law but laws get broken every day.
Call me cynical but I believe this info was know by some wall street insiders, hedge fund traders or big institutional investors and they drove the stock down. Sure it's against the law but laws get broken every day.
OK -- you are cynical.