You obviously don't run a company. Even though my two companies over the years were small, I didn't get involved in all of these financial matters.
You never got involved in your own money or portfolio, you own stock in your own company and you don't know how much stock you have or what it's worth? You let someone else handle your personal finances for you without your knowledge? You get paid with millions of shares in stock without you knowing any of the details? I hope not, but that's what people on this forum think Steve Jobs did.
You obviously don't run a company. Even though my two companies over the years were small, I didn't get involved in all of these financial matters.
Well guess what? If your bookeeper fucked up and you where audited, guess who would be fucked? You.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
While I don't really buy the line that Steve had done nothing wrong and knew nothing about the wrongdoing, I think that's more qualified than most people on the subject, including most that post here.
If you hadn't noticed, most people feel like commenting on something that they simply don't understand in the slightest. That type of person is everywhere.
You never got involved in your own money or portfolio, you own stock in your own company and you don't know how much stock you have or what it's worth? You let someone else handle your personal finances for you without your knowledge? You get paid with millions of shares in stock without you knowing any of the details? I hope not, but that's what people on this forum think Steve Jobs did.
There's a big difference in being involved in your own portfolio. Also, a big difference when you receive stock options. Of course you know the gist of these matters.
Did I pour through the books to make sure everything was done correctly? No. Finance wasn't my area. did I ask if everything was done properly? Yes. Did the auditors go over the books to make sure? Yes.
Your questions are silly.
If people don't understand how businesses are run, and how work is divided up amongst the people qualified to do that work, then perhaps they shouldn't be so quick to comment. I don't have a degree in accounting, and neither does Steve. The people who do, are the ones doing that work.
Heinen was not only the General counsel, she was also the Board Secretary. She was responsible to get the proper meeting notes in order. If Jobs asked her if everything was in order, and taken care of, and she said yes, then that would have been about it. Nothing more would have been done from his part. You always have to assume that the people you hire are honest, unless it can be shown otherwise. Apparently, she was the one who falsified the meeting notes.
So when Fred asked Steve if everything was ok, and Steve said yes, that would have been the end of it.
I know how people on the bottom like to tear down people at the top, but if the SEC found something, you can be sure we would know. Unless more evidence comes out showing otherwise, accept this finding.
Well guess what? If your bookeeper fucked up and you where audited, guess who would be fucked? You.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
I think you're cute too.
I may not have had more than 100 people in my companies, but the principle is the same, esp since one of them was a public company. What is your experience here?
Is Steve Jobs a friekin' genius at covering his arse? Hell yes.
Anderson didn't say that Jobs DID anything. Show where he did.
What he did say was that Jobs assured him that the Board had properly approved the actions in regards to the options.
That's a very different thing!
What is happening here is that Anderson's lawyer is attempting to make it clear that his client, who wasn't even accused of being involved in changing the dates in the board notes, had an assurance that everything was ok, so that there was no reason for him to have done more of his job, which required him to PERSONALLY check it out. That was why he was fined, because he didn't do HIS job of making sure that everything was properly done.
He doesn't say the Jobs was involved in any way. Let's make that clear.
So far, at least, the SEC agrees that Jobs wasn't involved. The fact that he thought that everything was fine doesn't mean that he committed fraud. The meeting notes were the responsibility of the Board Secretary, Nancy Heinen, who was the one who altered the dates of the meeting, and who also benefitted from that.
It hasn't been the job of the CEO to do that due diligence. That is what the other layers in the corporation are for. The General Counsel, the Board Secretary, the head of the Audit Committee, the CFO, and the Chairman.
Now, with S/O, there has been an attempt to get the President, CEO, COO and others to sign off on the financial statements as well, so as to make them more involved. I don't know how well that will work.
We will have to see what the Justice Department's probe says before this is finalized.
Comments
You obviously don't run a company. Even though my two companies over the years were small, I didn't get involved in all of these financial matters.
You never got involved in your own money or portfolio, you own stock in your own company and you don't know how much stock you have or what it's worth? You let someone else handle your personal finances for you without your knowledge? You get paid with millions of shares in stock without you knowing any of the details? I hope not, but that's what people on this forum think Steve Jobs did.
You obviously don't run a company. Even though my two companies over the years were small, I didn't get involved in all of these financial matters.
Well guess what? If your bookeeper fucked up and you where audited, guess who would be fucked? You.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
While I don't really buy the line that Steve had done nothing wrong and knew nothing about the wrongdoing, I think that's more qualified than most people on the subject, including most that post here.
If you hadn't noticed, most people feel like commenting on something that they simply don't understand in the slightest. That type of person is everywhere.
nuff said!
You never got involved in your own money or portfolio, you own stock in your own company and you don't know how much stock you have or what it's worth? You let someone else handle your personal finances for you without your knowledge? You get paid with millions of shares in stock without you knowing any of the details? I hope not, but that's what people on this forum think Steve Jobs did.
There's a big difference in being involved in your own portfolio. Also, a big difference when you receive stock options. Of course you know the gist of these matters.
Did I pour through the books to make sure everything was done correctly? No. Finance wasn't my area. did I ask if everything was done properly? Yes. Did the auditors go over the books to make sure? Yes.
Your questions are silly.
If people don't understand how businesses are run, and how work is divided up amongst the people qualified to do that work, then perhaps they shouldn't be so quick to comment. I don't have a degree in accounting, and neither does Steve. The people who do, are the ones doing that work.
Heinen was not only the General counsel, she was also the Board Secretary. She was responsible to get the proper meeting notes in order. If Jobs asked her if everything was in order, and taken care of, and she said yes, then that would have been about it. Nothing more would have been done from his part. You always have to assume that the people you hire are honest, unless it can be shown otherwise. Apparently, she was the one who falsified the meeting notes.
So when Fred asked Steve if everything was ok, and Steve said yes, that would have been the end of it.
I know how people on the bottom like to tear down people at the top, but if the SEC found something, you can be sure we would know. Unless more evidence comes out showing otherwise, accept this finding.
Well guess what? If your bookeeper fucked up and you where audited, guess who would be fucked? You.
Interesting how you feel you are qualified to add analysis regarding a fortune 500 company with billions in revenue, based on your experience in small business. I think that's kinda cute.
I think you're cute too.
I may not have had more than 100 people in my companies, but the principle is the same, esp since one of them was a public company. What is your experience here?
Throwing rocks from your safe little hole in the ground, are you?
Steve Jobs is a magician. No one ever said he was a saint, and anyone who doesn' like working with him is free to find another job.
Is Steve Jobs a friekin' genius at covering his arse? Hell yes.
Did Steve Jobs do what Anderson says? Probably.
Is Steve Jobs a friekin' genius at covering his arse? Hell yes.
Anderson didn't say that Jobs DID anything. Show where he did.
What he did say was that Jobs assured him that the Board had properly approved the actions in regards to the options.
That's a very different thing!
What is happening here is that Anderson's lawyer is attempting to make it clear that his client, who wasn't even accused of being involved in changing the dates in the board notes, had an assurance that everything was ok, so that there was no reason for him to have done more of his job, which required him to PERSONALLY check it out. That was why he was fined, because he didn't do HIS job of making sure that everything was properly done.
He doesn't say the Jobs was involved in any way. Let's make that clear.
So far, at least, the SEC agrees that Jobs wasn't involved. The fact that he thought that everything was fine doesn't mean that he committed fraud. The meeting notes were the responsibility of the Board Secretary, Nancy Heinen, who was the one who altered the dates of the meeting, and who also benefitted from that.
It hasn't been the job of the CEO to do that due diligence. That is what the other layers in the corporation are for. The General Counsel, the Board Secretary, the head of the Audit Committee, the CFO, and the Chairman.
Now, with S/O, there has been an attempt to get the President, CEO, COO and others to sign off on the financial statements as well, so as to make them more involved. I don't know how well that will work.
We will have to see what the Justice Department's probe says before this is finalized.
Criminal acts deserve to be punished even if that criminal is Steve Jobs. No need to ignore the laws just because the law breaker is your hero!
If Jobs goes Apple will go on no matter what dishonest fanboys might think or say.
No matter how it's spun Jobs was dishonest. You can not tell me that he did not know what he was doing.
Criminal acts deserve to be punished even if that criminal is Steve Jobs. No need to ignore the laws just because the law breaker is your hero!
If Jobs goes Apple will go on no matter what dishonest fanboys might think or say.
Well, you have your mind made up. I guess it would be useless to bother with any facts.
I suppose trolling is fun though.
We actually don't know this, the SEC has not cleared Jobs as far as I'm aware. You start at the bottom and work your way up.
If they were going to go after Jobs they would have done so already when they hit Anderson and Heinan.