?The question surrounding any kind of corporate disclosure always is: Is it material?? said Larry S. Gondelman, a lawyer with Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville. ?And there is no bright line test in determining materiality.? A spokesman for the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the law defined materiality as information that ?the reasonable investor needs to know in order to make an informed decision about his investment.?
bearing in mind the enormous credit Jobs is given for Apple's recent upsurge, I think it would be disingenious to suggest that his health is immaterial.
So if he has a cold he should hold a press conference stating he hasn't cold, that will you make you happy.
I will believe these rumors when someone comes up with proof. Show me hospital records that Steve has cancer again, or anything else. If it's true, there's some kind of paper trail. Find it. then I will believe any of it.
Steve actually showed his blood pressure and the joke about rumors of his death being exaggerated. In october he made a rare appearance at the earnings call and sounded fantastic and excited. Steve doesn't need to make monthly appearances to prove he is alive and not encased in carbonite in a cupertino vault.
Remember when a magazine "accidentally" ran an obituary earlier this year??! People are frothing at the mouth of the idea of steve dying. I don't understand this but I'm assuming we are seeing an inverse of the kind of speculation and froth we saw in 2000 when everyone was making up stories about how successful their dot-com company was. Its an inverse exuberance as the market gets driven downward. It back-fired on people then, and it will this time, too.
Exactly. Trying to blame the stock price decline of AAPL on a news story about something that EVERYBODY already knows, which is that Steve Jobs has cancer and is not healthy, while ignoring that Apple is a luxury company during a depression, is frankly moronic.
For a luxury company it sure seems to becoming rapidly like a company that continues to satisfy needs, not luxuries: of many, not an elite few.
I will believe these rumors when someone comes up with proof. Show me hospital records that Steve has cancer again, or anything else. If it's true, there's some kind of paper trail. Find it. then I will believe any of it.
Fact is that Steve is not the end all and be all of Apple and all these sites and business writers etc need to figure this out. Judge the company by what they make and do, not by the guy who is the spokesperson.
Also, the name of the game is profit. when a company does things like trade shows it is because the move is cost effective in the game of making more money and thus more profit. A number of companies have dropped doing Macworld and other trade shows because it's too expensive for the benefit to the holy profit margin. why when Adobe etc do it, is it a smart business move but when Apple does, it is a sign of doom and a validator of a bunch of stupid rumors.
The outrageous views from all sides are frustrating.
1. As fond as I am of the company, Apple has to take the lion's share of the blame for today's events. I would not expect Apple to respond to the Gizmodo rumor, but as I posted at the time (Link), Apple should have done more to head off misinterpretation when they made the MacWorld announcements. A little better effort to communicate on Apple's part could have avoided the initial 6% drop in stock value, as well as all the subsequent fud which has kept the stock down, and encouraged speculation.
2. Apple stock fell nearly $3 within minutes of Gizmodo's rumor. Given that there are something like 890 million shares outstanding, that's well over 2.5 billion dollars of value. Thus, I do hope that the SEC looks into this rumor just as it looked into the false report of Steve Jobs' heart attack in early October. I suspect that they will find a lone teenager here as well, but investigating rumors that cost billions is part of the SEC's job.
To be fair, I don't think it would be unreasonable for the SEC to investigate Steve Jobs' health as well. There are investors who are worried that Apple is not being honest (I'm not among them), and you can bet that some of them have contacted the SEC. With a company as large as Apple it's reasonable that the SEC should be paying attention. The SEC can't babysit every little detail of the marketplace, but it has an important role to play in keeping the market as fair and transparent as possible. It has done a poor job on many fronts over the last decade, and that's part of the reason for the current economic crisis.
3. Gizmodo is no worse or better than most blog sites. But context and tone and other issues are relevant. Gizmodo put this story with a large picture on the front page of their site. The author twice calls attention to the previous reliability of the source. Given the obvious importance of the issue, and the numerous reasons to doubt this rumor (like the fact that Jim Goldman and other mainstream media and analysts have denied that Jobs is ill, and that Apple spokespeople have denied the relevance of Jobs' health to the MacWorld announcements), I think Gizmodo was irresponsible.
4. The drop in stock value turned this rumor into a legitimate news story that merits publication and discussion on Appleinsider, the LA Times, and elsewhere. But moreover, Appleinsider is a different type of site than Gizmodo. The context and tone of Appleinsider generally make it obvious that you should not put too much faith in the rumors. Rumors on Appleinsider do likely contribute to stock trends, but they've never caused a noticeable movement in share value. Maybe that's just luck, or a sign of irrelevance, but it's an important distinction. That's not to say that Appleinsider has a spotless reputation. I've been disappointed with certain articles that have seemed inappropriate for one reason or another, but on the whole I think Appleinsider avoids the type of mistake Gizmodo made. Indeed, AppleInsider's coverage of this rumor which includes a brief history of Jobs' health plus links is quite admirable.
5. The internet is still a wild new territory. The rules for appropriate behavior haven't yet been worked out. This is partially why a rumor like this one merits discussion, and partially why the SEC should be investigating. Everyone on the internet should be conscious of what they're saying and it's effect, and there should be repercussions for egregious offenses. I'm not suggesting that Gizmodo needs to be punished, but I think it would be appropriate if they felt like their reputation has taken a hit from a broader community who disapproves of their behavior.
6. All the speculation about Jobs' health and impending retirement is disgusting. There's no good evidence of either. All signs suggest that he's doing what he loves; Mick Jagger will lead the Stones until he collapses in a heap on the stage, and Jobs will pursue innovative technology until he can't lift his iPhone. And fortunately, in accord with all responsible reports, that's not likely to happen for many years.
7. Apple stock is a phenomenal buy. In contrast to wizard69's pessimism, Apple is firing on all cylinders and it's future looks brighter than ever:
a) Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
b) No technology segment is growing faster than smart phones, and Apple has the single most desireable phone on the market. Even if Apple only manages 20% of all smart phones over the next five years, they stand to earn more money off phones than they do off Macs. The iPhone has already generated billions in revenue much of which is not accounted for in aapl's PE. For more details read Andy Zaky's excellent article here on AppleInsider. Link
c) The iPod Touch is creating a whole new market for Apple as a gaming platform/portable computer for a new generation. I could see this coming after my first visit to the app store last summer, but reports all year long have confirmed it. The app store is an astounding success, and once all the kids who received these things for Christmas show them to their friends, we'll realize that the explosion has only begun. The games aren't as complex or readily controllable as those on the DS and the PSP, but for versatility, excitement, affordability and sheer coolness, nothing touches the Touch.
d) Apple has a lead in software and hardware that no one can easily replicate. OS X is an 800 pound gorilla at the center of everything Apple does. Despite the complaints that Apple's current quality does not live up to the mythical perfection of old, Leopard is an extraordinary foundation for growth, and the fact that Apple can work on it to power all their platforms provides a type of economy of scale that no one else can match. In hardware, the iPhone and the Touch are far ahead of the competition, and there's no doubt that Apple intends to keep this lead. We have yet to see the fruits of the PA Semi acquisition.
e) Eventually we will see a tablet or ProTouch or something similar. Apple has the pieces in place, and there's every reason to believe that it could be a huge success.
f) The AppleTV is not dead. It's a product of the future. I've posted on it before, where my main point is that in conjunction with the iPhone/Touch as a remote the AppleTV will eventually come into its own. Link As it is, Apple distributes more paid programming over the iTunes store than any competitor, and discs are a slowly dying technology.
g) What stock would you add to the Dow once you pull a couple carmakers?
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
perhaps he is thin because he stopped eating a bunch of crappy fattening food etc. and not because he's going to kick it any day now.
Having personally had food at company functions with the man, he's a vegetarian whose only real craving is non-vegetarian sushi.
Hell, he even has orange juice with granola. He always admired the Got Milk campaign but never the claim that Milk is really healthy for you when their are better options that don't cause such lovely side effects as lactose intolerance.
IF Mr. jobs is fine why wouldn't he simply hold a 10 minute news conference with a reporter of his choosing, at a location of his choosing, at a time of his choosing to calm fears of his being ill?!
Convention participation is one issue. Steve's health or well being is another.
This can be really easy and simple. Why hide or be absent?
If anything the manner in which this is all being managed does not bode well for Apple.
The more important the person the more his supporters need to know FROM HIM that his well being is good.
Something is not right. The truth always shows itself.
Patience!
They have already said he's fine, what more do you want them to do, to give a weekly update on someone's private health matter, some of you are utterly sick.
Every time one of these rumors come up, everyone hides their heads in the sand and says this is not true. I'm sorry to say but ever since i heard Steve was diagnosed with pancreatic caner I knew he lived on borrowed time. We all need to get used to this fact. I have friends who have family members who have died of this cancer and no one survives more than 4 years. The surgery Steve had was the same one that The Last Lecture, author Randy Pausch had. Randy died in June 2008. The surgery bought him some time as well, 2 years.
The thing about pancreatic caner is that there are hardly any symptoms. Thats why its a death sentence, by the time its discovered its too late.
if for some reason Steven's body can heal. Then we will see. I really feel bad for him and his family. Also I know losing him will take a little piece out of me. Like having a friend there everyday who you look forward to what they are going to say or do.
Until that time, enjoy every minute. Life's too short to sit around and argue about things we don't know much about.
Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
I know that some of you fanboys do not leave your bedroom very much, but if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better.
I guarantee you that Mac sales have stopped increasing by 20-30% and would probably wager we will see the first decrease for a while in the next reportings.
There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. The whole industry will be in decline but some companies will manage it better than others. When there are $400 netbooks flying off the shelves how many people are actually buying overpriced MacBooks?
It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?
I'm sorry to say but ever since i heard Steve was diagnosed with pancreatic caner I knew he lived on borrowed time. We all need to get used to this fact. I have friends who have family members who have died of this cancer and no one survives more than 4 years. The surgery Steve had was the same one that The Last Lecture, author Randy Pausch had.
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
[sarcasm]A GIANT of Medical Knowledge walks among us![/sarcasm] (aka indenial irrational Mac fanatic crapping 'self at the prospect of the inevitable demise of his personal Jesus/reason for existence.
Sorry to see you so indenial of Jobs increasingly likely last few weeks (naturally hopefully suffering free) on this earth, that makes you twist and make up Medical FACTS at a rate of knots.
He had surgery to remove a cancerous TUMOUR - which was 100% successful.
"Cancer" is the name of a MEDICAL condition (illness etc) - in terms of physical existence it is NONSENSICAL to state it can be "totally removed" by surgery.
The surgery's aim was to improve the outlook of prognosis - not the irradication of the chance of relapse/cancer return ie "there is currently no cure for cancer"
Pancreatic cancer is a HIGHLY aggressive form of cancer with a corresponding prognosis of a few years if initial surgery is successful. In terms of prognoses there are NO FORMS of 'non-aggressive' cancer of the pancreas - this is clearly FUD spread around by VERY medically ignorant Mac fanatics getting increasingly desperate the closer their comming traumatic (as asociated with their fanatiscism) loss.
Now you can check i'm not bullsh!tting/FUD spreading by cross referencing what i've said with some respectable Medical source(s) - as opposed to the opening your mouth and (as usual for a Mac fanatic) arrogantly letting your belly rumble in replace of accurate Medical knowledge (and no doubt, aswell, any other specialized scientific objective information - well you do voluntary choose to use a Mac after all )
“The question surrounding any kind of corporate disclosure always is: Is it material?” said Larry S. Gondelman, a lawyer with Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville. “And there is no bright line test in determining materiality.” A spokesman for the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the law defined materiality as information that “the reasonable investor needs to know in order to make an informed decision about his investment.”
bearing in mind the enormous credit Jobs is given for Apple's recent upsurge, I think it would be disingenious to suggest that his health is immaterial.
Emphasis added.
Outside of short term movements, that reasonable people can take advantage of--if prescient enough--a reasonable investor does not make investment decisions based solely on who's at the helm. For example, a reasonable investor would not have fallen for Madoff's Ponzi scheme after several reputable investment journalists had exposed the absence of any basis in reality for his massive gains. The ones who signed-up after the questions were raised did so because of the name, and that's it. I've got another example, this one from the world of fiction: Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged; I'm reminded of the doomed mining ventures undertaken by playboy Francisco d’Ancona in his plan to show what the world is like when thinkers go on strike. For anyone unfamiliar, d'Ancona was a successful heir to a mining fortune who went on to have personal success, but he gave it up to become a playboy; then he decided to open a new mining venture in an area where no one had any business believing there were any ore deposits; people invested only because of his name--despite knowing that he was a washed-up playboy.
The point I'm getting at is that SJ's health is his own business and he is not required by law to disclose such matters. If investors are buying/holding/selling shares only because of Steve Jobs' potential future with the company, they had best be exceedingly adept at short term trading; otherwise, they are unreasonable.
That said, I own shares of Apple. My average cost per share is ~$65. I sure wish I had sold at ~$200, but I'm not selling now, even with a rather tidy would-be-profit to be made from the current price of $86.29. If I'd sold at $200, I'd be buying on dips such as today's. As it is, I'm just holding, no buying or selling. The reason I bought into Apple in the first place was that I found my PC self being seduced. I tried using Macs and found myself smitten. If I could be turned, I knew Apple was on the cusp of continually increasing revenue.
The stock will go down if something bad happens to Steve; same for a well managed, planned, transition; but it will then go back up--because Apple is an excellent company.
Certainly, the examples I cite in making my point show that an investment's perceived value is influenced by who the HMFIC is; but the crux of the biscuit is that that doesn't make such effects reasonable in and of themselves. Markets move in all directions for all sorts of stupid things. For example, today's general market gains are being attributed to GMAC Financial Services getting $5 billion from the government... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/...re/wall_street That's just laughable. (That's shor good news ar'ight; hyuck, hyuck.)
For some perspective, Apple closed 32¢ down today. That's one powerful rumor--a whole -0.37%! The 52 week low is $79.14.
I think the uncertainty of Job's future is already priced into the stock.
Wizard69/Dave: You're all over the place. You argue for a liberal political conspiracy based on "long-known" mortgage troubles and recent improvements in the war in Iraq, while simultaneously acknowledging A) pressures on politicians to make loans affordable, and market manipulations by people who know zip about economics. (See post #92.) That makes no sense.
Barney Frank got his ass chewed by Bill O'Reilly for the long-known mortgage troubles. But the question is: long-known by who? Some people, yes (you can count BB&T CEO John Allison in that select group, but not Bill O'Reilly; he's just a prick who get's off on belittling people). But liberal politicians? Alan Greenspan was just as clueless. Remember his recent testimony? How can the people who were so stupid on the economy be given the credit of planning the mortgage crisis qua crisis? News flash: politicians get elected by giving stuff away & that seldom pays long term dividends. They did what they always do and the predictable results happened. You're claiming they planned the bust to happen right around election time--at the same time some positive gains were being seen in Iraq--just to further liberal policies? That's nuts. On its face it's nuts; factor in that the presidential election was actually fairly close in terms of the popular vote and it's just crazy nuts.
By the way, for those wondering about me after my Rand reference, I'm a cautious admirer. I hold with Milton Friedman who said this of Rand: "I think she was a fascinating woman and had a great influence. As I always have said, she had an extremely good influence on all those who did not become Randians. But if they became Randians, they were hopeless." (Read his interview with Reason magazine here.) I mention this since AR references can be rather polarizing; I really don't want to get into all that--just sharing an example that came to mind.
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
It's not the cancer that is Steve's problem. It's the aftermath. Because it was not the typical pancreatic cancer, Jobs waited to have it removed, hoping a special diet would help. Read further about the Whipple procedure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreaticoduodenectomy A major surgery with a high complication and mortality rate that let's just say, is not needed for "healthy" people."A second surgery is often needed to fight infection. Jobs had a second surgery for reasons that were not disclosed. I hope he is as healthy as anyone can be with that procedure. I'm not sure you would ever call your self "fit as a fiddle" though after undergoing all that.
The outrageous views from all sides are frustrating.
1. As fond as I am of the company, Apple has to take the lion's share of the blame for today's events. I would not expect Apple to respond to the Gizmodo rumor, but as I posted at the time (Link), Apple should have done more to head off misinterpretation when they made the MacWorld announcements. A little better effort to communicate on Apple's part could have avoided the initial 6% drop in stock value, as well as all the subsequent fud which has kept the stock down, and encouraged speculation.
2. Apple stock fell nearly $3 within minutes of Gizmodo's rumor. Given that there are something like 890 million shares outstanding, that's well over 2.5 billion dollars of value. Thus, I do hope that the SEC looks into this rumor just as it looked into the false report of Steve Jobs' heart attack in early October. I suspect that they will find a lone teenager here as well, but investigating rumors that cost billions is part of the SEC's job.
To be fair, I don't think it would be unreasonable for the SEC to investigate Steve Jobs' health as well. There are investors who are worried that Apple is not being honest (I'm not among them), and you can bet that some of them have contacted the SEC. With a company as large as Apple it's reasonable that the SEC should be paying attention. The SEC can't babysit every little detail of the marketplace, but it has an important role to play in keeping the market as fair and transparent as possible. It has done a poor job on many fronts over the last decade, and that's part of the reason for the current economic crisis.
3. Gizmodo is no worse or better than most blog sites. But context and tone and other issues are relevant. Gizmodo put this story with a large picture on the front page of their site. The author twice calls attention to the previous reliability of the source. Given the obvious importance of the issue, and the numerous reasons to doubt this rumor (like the fact that Jim Goldman and other mainstream media and analysts have denied that Jobs is ill, and that Apple spokespeople have denied the relevance of Jobs' health to the MacWorld announcements), I think Gizmodo was irresponsible.
4. The drop in stock value turned this rumor into a legitimate news story that merits publication and discussion on Appleinsider, the LA Times, and elsewhere. But moreover, Appleinsider is a different type of site than Gizmodo. The context and tone of Appleinsider generally make it obvious that you should not put too much faith in the rumors. Rumors on Appleinsider do likely contribute to stock trends, but they've never caused a noticeable movement in share value. Maybe that's just luck, or a sign of irrelevance, but it's an important distinction. That's not to say that Appleinsider has a spotless reputation. I've been disappointed with certain articles that have seemed inappropriate for one reason or another, but on the whole I think Appleinsider avoids the type of mistake Gizmodo made. Indeed, AppleInsider's coverage of this rumor which includes a brief history of Jobs' health plus links is quite admirable.
5. The internet is still a wild new territory. The rules for appropriate behavior haven't yet been worked out. This is partially why a rumor like this one merits discussion, and partially why the SEC should be investigating. Everyone on the internet should be conscious of what they're saying and it's effect, and there should be repercussions for egregious offenses. I'm not suggesting that Gizmodo needs to be punished, but I think it would be appropriate if they felt like their reputation has taken a hit from a broader community who disapproves of their behavior.
6. All the speculation about Jobs' health and impending retirement is disgusting. There's no good evidence of either. All signs suggest that he's doing what he loves; Mick Jagger will lead the Stones until he collapses in a heap on the stage, and Jobs will pursue innovative technology until he can't lift his iPhone. And fortunately, in accord with all responsible reports, that's not likely to happen for many years.
7. Apple stock is a phenomenal buy. In contrast to wizard69's pessimism, Apple is firing on all cylinders and it's future looks brighter than ever:
a) Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
b) No technology segment is growing faster than smart phones, and Apple has the single most desireable phone on the market. Even if Apple only manages 20% of all smart phones over the next five years, they stand to earn more money off phones than they do off Macs. The iPhone has already generated billions in revenue much of which is not accounted for in aapl's PE. For more details read Andy Zaky's excellent article here on AppleInsider. Link
c) The iPod Touch is creating a whole new market for Apple as a gaming platform/portable computer for a new generation. I could see this coming after my first visit to the app store last summer, but reports all year long have confirmed it. The app store is an astounding success, and once all the kids who received these things for Christmas show them to their friends, we'll realize that the explosion has only begun. The games aren't as complex or readily controllable as those on the DS and the PSP, but for versatility, excitement, affordability and sheer coolness, nothing touches the Touch.
d) Apple has a lead in software and hardware that no one can easily replicate. OS X is an 800 pound gorilla at the center of everything Apple does. Despite the complaints that Apple's current quality does not live up to the mythical perfection of old, Leopard is an extraordinary foundation for growth, and the fact that Apple can work on it to power all their platforms provides a type of economy of scale that no one else can match. In hardware, the iPhone and the Touch are far ahead of the competition, and there's no doubt that Apple intends to keep this lead. We have yet to see the fruits of the PA Semi acquisition.
e) Eventually we will see a tablet or ProTouch or something similar. Apple has the pieces in place, and there's every reason to believe that it could be a huge success.
f) The AppleTV is not dead. It's a product of the future. I've posted on it before, where my main point is that in conjunction with the iPhone/Touch as a remote the AppleTV will eventually come into its own. Link As it is, Apple distributes more paid programming over the iTunes store than any competitor, and discs are a slowly dying technology.
g) What stock would you add to the Dow once you pull a couple carmakers?
Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.
Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.
But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.
The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.
Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.
It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.
Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.
Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.
I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".
Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
[sarcasm]A GIANT of Medical Knowledge walks among us![/sarcasm] (aka indenial irrational Mac fanatic sh!tin' 'self at the prospect of the inevitable demise of his personal Jesus/reason for existence.
Sorry to see you so indenial of Jobs increasingly likely last few weeks (naturally hopefully suffering free) on this earth, that makes you twist and make up Medical FACTS at a rate of knots.
He had surgery to remove a cancerous TUMOUR - which was 100% successful.
"Cancer" is the name of a MEDICAL condition (illness etc) - in terms of physical existence it is NONSENSICAL to state it can be "totally removed" by surgery.
The surgery's aim was to improve the outlook of prognosis - not the irradication of the chance of relapse/cancer return ie "there is currently no cure for cancer"
Pancreatic cancer is a HIGHLY aggressive form of cancer with a corresponding prognosis of a few years if initial surgery is successful. In terms of prognoses there are NO FORMS of 'non-aggressive' cancer of the pancreas - this is clearly FUD spread around by VERY medically ignorant Mac fanatics getting increasingly desperate the closer their comming traumatic (as asociated with their fanatiscism) loss.
Now you can check i'm not bulls*!tin/FUD spreading by cross referencing what i've said with some respectable Medical source(s) <IE NOT wikipedia - since when is that a reliable sole source for facts??? just shows the degree of Mac fanatics desperation/denial of the highly bleed.in likely> - as opposed to the opening your mouth and (as usual for a Mac fanatic) arrogantly letting your belly rumble in replace of accurate Medical knowledge (and no doubt any other specialized scientific objective information - well you do voluntary choose to use a Mac after all )
...if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better. ...
There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. ...
It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?
I granted that Apple is likely to see a pause in Mac momentum, but I don't think it will be as severe as you suggest. Let's talk about the current quarter: One thing in Apple's favor is that last year there were no new MacBooks, but this year there are. Reports have put sales of the MacBook up 28% in Oct. (Link) and 22% in November (Link).
I take it that your worry about Mac sales is that NPD said that overall Mac sales were flat for November. They said this because even though Macbooks were up, desktops were down. But in actuality, flat is not bad news since there were 5 fewer shopping days after Thanksgiving in Nov. than last year. If Apple pulled off flat sales overall for November, then they'll likely be up at least slightly for December, and since they were almost certainly up for October, things don't look too shabby. And note, unlike Dell and HP, Apple has done this without lowering prices. Thus Mac revenue should be quite respectable. Moreover, once the new Minis and iMacs are announced, there will be a new sales engine for the March quarter.
IPod sales may be challenging, but the news isn't all bad. It's almost certain that Nanos and Shuffles will be down, but the Touch will be up significantly. The Touch held the top two spots on Amazon for mp3 players for weeks. So, even if total iPod units are down, I'm guessing iPod revenue will increase. Nor should we forget the app store. Revenue from the app store this quarter could be significant, and it's all gravy.
The iPhone sales number is anybody's guess. There are too many variables for informed speculation. But, don't forget that Apple only records 1/8 of the revenue per quarter over a two year period, so sales aren't going to have a significant impact on the bottom line, and the bottom line will benefit from the sales in previous quarters. Of course, any decline in sales will be bad for investor psychology, but really, there's no reliable evidence about what the numbers will be - they could be fine.
The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things. There is too much money out there, and society is too wealthy and humanity too greedy, for commerce as we know it to evaporate. We are experiencing a hiccup in a long term trend of increased production and consumption. I'm not saying that's a good thing, and some day it will come crashing down disastrously, but the cause will be more profound- something like war or disease or climate catastrophe. Moreover, since the 30's, time has sped up. Buisness cycles that may have taken a decade to work themselves out back then, speed by in a flash today. I predict that Apple will not only survive, but thrive.
The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things.
Dude, I admire your optimism but think it is entirely unfounded. We have only seen that start of this puppy, things will get much worse before they get better.
In the US they are just about to report the worst Christmas shopping figures for 40 years!!
Comments
A CEO of a listed company if he/she believes it materially affects them doing their job.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/26/bu...QnUY3A9yNO0GsQ
?The question surrounding any kind of corporate disclosure always is: Is it material?? said Larry S. Gondelman, a lawyer with Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville. ?And there is no bright line test in determining materiality.? A spokesman for the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the law defined materiality as information that ?the reasonable investor needs to know in order to make an informed decision about his investment.?
bearing in mind the enormous credit Jobs is given for Apple's recent upsurge, I think it would be disingenious to suggest that his health is immaterial.
So if he has a cold he should hold a press conference stating he hasn't cold, that will you make you happy.
You are correct. I'd do the responsible thing for the company and the stock holders and hold a press conference to put the subject to rest.
Apple nor Steve Jobs has done the responsible thing and are acting irresponsible by not doing so.
So I guess if you had a cold you would be holding a press conference, in fact why dont you make it a weekly update.
I will believe these rumors when someone comes up with proof. Show me hospital records that Steve has cancer again, or anything else. If it's true, there's some kind of paper trail. Find it. then I will believe any of it.
Steve actually showed his blood pressure and the joke about rumors of his death being exaggerated. In october he made a rare appearance at the earnings call and sounded fantastic and excited. Steve doesn't need to make monthly appearances to prove he is alive and not encased in carbonite in a cupertino vault.
Remember when a magazine "accidentally" ran an obituary earlier this year??! People are frothing at the mouth of the idea of steve dying. I don't understand this but I'm assuming we are seeing an inverse of the kind of speculation and froth we saw in 2000 when everyone was making up stories about how successful their dot-com company was. Its an inverse exuberance as the market gets driven downward. It back-fired on people then, and it will this time, too.
No.
How do you know he won't show up next week genius, they just said he won't be the one givng the keynote.
Exactly. Trying to blame the stock price decline of AAPL on a news story about something that EVERYBODY already knows, which is that Steve Jobs has cancer and is not healthy, while ignoring that Apple is a luxury company during a depression, is frankly moronic.
For a luxury company it sure seems to becoming rapidly like a company that continues to satisfy needs, not luxuries: of many, not an elite few.
I will believe these rumors when someone comes up with proof. Show me hospital records that Steve has cancer again, or anything else. If it's true, there's some kind of paper trail. Find it. then I will believe any of it.
Fact is that Steve is not the end all and be all of Apple and all these sites and business writers etc need to figure this out. Judge the company by what they make and do, not by the guy who is the spokesperson.
Also, the name of the game is profit. when a company does things like trade shows it is because the move is cost effective in the game of making more money and thus more profit. A number of companies have dropped doing Macworld and other trade shows because it's too expensive for the benefit to the holy profit margin. why when Adobe etc do it, is it a smart business move but when Apple does, it is a sign of doom and a validator of a bunch of stupid rumors.
Well said dude you on point.
1. As fond as I am of the company, Apple has to take the lion's share of the blame for today's events. I would not expect Apple to respond to the Gizmodo rumor, but as I posted at the time (Link), Apple should have done more to head off misinterpretation when they made the MacWorld announcements. A little better effort to communicate on Apple's part could have avoided the initial 6% drop in stock value, as well as all the subsequent fud which has kept the stock down, and encouraged speculation.
2. Apple stock fell nearly $3 within minutes of Gizmodo's rumor. Given that there are something like 890 million shares outstanding, that's well over 2.5 billion dollars of value. Thus, I do hope that the SEC looks into this rumor just as it looked into the false report of Steve Jobs' heart attack in early October. I suspect that they will find a lone teenager here as well, but investigating rumors that cost billions is part of the SEC's job.
To be fair, I don't think it would be unreasonable for the SEC to investigate Steve Jobs' health as well. There are investors who are worried that Apple is not being honest (I'm not among them), and you can bet that some of them have contacted the SEC. With a company as large as Apple it's reasonable that the SEC should be paying attention. The SEC can't babysit every little detail of the marketplace, but it has an important role to play in keeping the market as fair and transparent as possible. It has done a poor job on many fronts over the last decade, and that's part of the reason for the current economic crisis.
3. Gizmodo is no worse or better than most blog sites. But context and tone and other issues are relevant. Gizmodo put this story with a large picture on the front page of their site. The author twice calls attention to the previous reliability of the source. Given the obvious importance of the issue, and the numerous reasons to doubt this rumor (like the fact that Jim Goldman and other mainstream media and analysts have denied that Jobs is ill, and that Apple spokespeople have denied the relevance of Jobs' health to the MacWorld announcements), I think Gizmodo was irresponsible.
4. The drop in stock value turned this rumor into a legitimate news story that merits publication and discussion on Appleinsider, the LA Times, and elsewhere. But moreover, Appleinsider is a different type of site than Gizmodo. The context and tone of Appleinsider generally make it obvious that you should not put too much faith in the rumors. Rumors on Appleinsider do likely contribute to stock trends, but they've never caused a noticeable movement in share value. Maybe that's just luck, or a sign of irrelevance, but it's an important distinction. That's not to say that Appleinsider has a spotless reputation. I've been disappointed with certain articles that have seemed inappropriate for one reason or another, but on the whole I think Appleinsider avoids the type of mistake Gizmodo made. Indeed, AppleInsider's coverage of this rumor which includes a brief history of Jobs' health plus links is quite admirable.
5. The internet is still a wild new territory. The rules for appropriate behavior haven't yet been worked out. This is partially why a rumor like this one merits discussion, and partially why the SEC should be investigating. Everyone on the internet should be conscious of what they're saying and it's effect, and there should be repercussions for egregious offenses. I'm not suggesting that Gizmodo needs to be punished, but I think it would be appropriate if they felt like their reputation has taken a hit from a broader community who disapproves of their behavior.
6. All the speculation about Jobs' health and impending retirement is disgusting. There's no good evidence of either. All signs suggest that he's doing what he loves; Mick Jagger will lead the Stones until he collapses in a heap on the stage, and Jobs will pursue innovative technology until he can't lift his iPhone. And fortunately, in accord with all responsible reports, that's not likely to happen for many years.
7. Apple stock is a phenomenal buy. In contrast to wizard69's pessimism, Apple is firing on all cylinders and it's future looks brighter than ever:
a) Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
b) No technology segment is growing faster than smart phones, and Apple has the single most desireable phone on the market. Even if Apple only manages 20% of all smart phones over the next five years, they stand to earn more money off phones than they do off Macs. The iPhone has already generated billions in revenue much of which is not accounted for in aapl's PE. For more details read Andy Zaky's excellent article here on AppleInsider. Link
c) The iPod Touch is creating a whole new market for Apple as a gaming platform/portable computer for a new generation. I could see this coming after my first visit to the app store last summer, but reports all year long have confirmed it. The app store is an astounding success, and once all the kids who received these things for Christmas show them to their friends, we'll realize that the explosion has only begun. The games aren't as complex or readily controllable as those on the DS and the PSP, but for versatility, excitement, affordability and sheer coolness, nothing touches the Touch.
d) Apple has a lead in software and hardware that no one can easily replicate. OS X is an 800 pound gorilla at the center of everything Apple does. Despite the complaints that Apple's current quality does not live up to the mythical perfection of old, Leopard is an extraordinary foundation for growth, and the fact that Apple can work on it to power all their platforms provides a type of economy of scale that no one else can match. In hardware, the iPhone and the Touch are far ahead of the competition, and there's no doubt that Apple intends to keep this lead. We have yet to see the fruits of the PA Semi acquisition.
e) Eventually we will see a tablet or ProTouch or something similar. Apple has the pieces in place, and there's every reason to believe that it could be a huge success.
f) The AppleTV is not dead. It's a product of the future. I've posted on it before, where my main point is that in conjunction with the iPhone/Touch as a remote the AppleTV will eventually come into its own. Link As it is, Apple distributes more paid programming over the iTunes store than any competitor, and discs are a slowly dying technology.
g) What stock would you add to the Dow once you pull a couple carmakers?
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
perhaps he is thin because he stopped eating a bunch of crappy fattening food etc. and not because he's going to kick it any day now.
Having personally had food at company functions with the man, he's a vegetarian whose only real craving is non-vegetarian sushi.
Hell, he even has orange juice with granola. He always admired the Got Milk campaign but never the claim that Milk is really healthy for you when their are better options that don't cause such lovely side effects as lactose intolerance.
IF Mr. jobs is fine why wouldn't he simply hold a 10 minute news conference with a reporter of his choosing, at a location of his choosing, at a time of his choosing to calm fears of his being ill?!
Convention participation is one issue. Steve's health or well being is another.
This can be really easy and simple. Why hide or be absent?
If anything the manner in which this is all being managed does not bode well for Apple.
The more important the person the more his supporters need to know FROM HIM that his well being is good.
Something is not right. The truth always shows itself.
Patience!
They have already said he's fine, what more do you want them to do, to give a weekly update on someone's private health matter, some of you are utterly sick.
The thing about pancreatic caner is that there are hardly any symptoms. Thats why its a death sentence, by the time its discovered its too late.
if for some reason Steven's body can heal. Then we will see. I really feel bad for him and his family. Also I know losing him will take a little piece out of me. Like having a friend there everyday who you look forward to what they are going to say or do.
Until that time, enjoy every minute. Life's too short to sit around and argue about things we don't know much about.
for more information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Pausch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
I know that some of you fanboys do not leave your bedroom very much, but if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better.
I guarantee you that Mac sales have stopped increasing by 20-30% and would probably wager we will see the first decrease for a while in the next reportings.
There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. The whole industry will be in decline but some companies will manage it better than others. When there are $400 netbooks flying off the shelves how many people are actually buying overpriced MacBooks?
It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?
I'm sorry to say but ever since i heard Steve was diagnosed with pancreatic caner I knew he lived on borrowed time. We all need to get used to this fact. I have friends who have family members who have died of this cancer and no one survives more than 4 years. The surgery Steve had was the same one that The Last Lecture, author Randy Pausch had.
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
Wikipedia Link for Steve Jobs
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
Wikipedia Link for Steve Jobs
if it was just some 'tumor' Well then why the whipple procedure. I have feeling we will see for ourselves in 6 months..
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
[sarcasm]A GIANT of Medical Knowledge walks among us![/sarcasm] (aka indenial irrational Mac fanatic crapping 'self at the prospect of the inevitable demise of his personal Jesus/reason for existence.
Sorry to see you so indenial of Jobs increasingly likely last few weeks (naturally hopefully suffering free) on this earth, that makes you twist and make up Medical FACTS at a rate of knots.
He had surgery to remove a cancerous TUMOUR - which was 100% successful.
"Cancer" is the name of a MEDICAL condition (illness etc) - in terms of physical existence it is NONSENSICAL to state it can be "totally removed" by surgery.
The surgery's aim was to improve the outlook of prognosis - not the irradication of the chance of relapse/cancer return ie "there is currently no cure for cancer"
Pancreatic cancer is a HIGHLY aggressive form of cancer with a corresponding prognosis of a few years if initial surgery is successful. In terms of prognoses there are NO FORMS of 'non-aggressive' cancer of the pancreas - this is clearly FUD spread around by VERY medically ignorant Mac fanatics getting increasingly desperate the closer their comming traumatic (as asociated with their fanatiscism) loss.
Now you can check i'm not bullsh!tting/FUD spreading by cross referencing what i've said with some respectable Medical source(s) - as opposed to the opening your mouth and (as usual for a Mac fanatic) arrogantly letting your belly rumble in replace of accurate Medical knowledge (and no doubt, aswell, any other specialized scientific objective information - well you do voluntary choose to use a Mac after all
“The question surrounding any kind of corporate disclosure always is: Is it material?” said Larry S. Gondelman, a lawyer with Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville. “And there is no bright line test in determining materiality.” A spokesman for the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the law defined materiality as information that “the reasonable investor needs to know in order to make an informed decision about his investment.”
bearing in mind the enormous credit Jobs is given for Apple's recent upsurge, I think it would be disingenious to suggest that his health is immaterial.
Emphasis added.
Outside of short term movements, that reasonable people can take advantage of--if prescient enough--a reasonable investor does not make investment decisions based solely on who's at the helm. For example, a reasonable investor would not have fallen for Madoff's Ponzi scheme after several reputable investment journalists had exposed the absence of any basis in reality for his massive gains. The ones who signed-up after the questions were raised did so because of the name, and that's it. I've got another example, this one from the world of fiction: Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged; I'm reminded of the doomed mining ventures undertaken by playboy Francisco d’Ancona in his plan to show what the world is like when thinkers go on strike. For anyone unfamiliar, d'Ancona was a successful heir to a mining fortune who went on to have personal success, but he gave it up to become a playboy; then he decided to open a new mining venture in an area where no one had any business believing there were any ore deposits; people invested only because of his name--despite knowing that he was a washed-up playboy.
The point I'm getting at is that SJ's health is his own business and he is not required by law to disclose such matters. If investors are buying/holding/selling shares only because of Steve Jobs' potential future with the company, they had best be exceedingly adept at short term trading; otherwise, they are unreasonable.
That said, I own shares of Apple. My average cost per share is ~$65. I sure wish I had sold at ~$200, but I'm not selling now, even with a rather tidy would-be-profit to be made from the current price of $86.29. If I'd sold at $200, I'd be buying on dips such as today's. As it is, I'm just holding, no buying or selling. The reason I bought into Apple in the first place was that I found my PC self being seduced. I tried using Macs and found myself smitten. If I could be turned, I knew Apple was on the cusp of continually increasing revenue.
The stock will go down if something bad happens to Steve; same for a well managed, planned, transition; but it will then go back up--because Apple is an excellent company.
Certainly, the examples I cite in making my point show that an investment's perceived value is influenced by who the HMFIC is; but the crux of the biscuit is that that doesn't make such effects reasonable in and of themselves. Markets move in all directions for all sorts of stupid things. For example, today's general market gains are being attributed to GMAC Financial Services getting $5 billion from the government... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/...re/wall_street That's just laughable. (That's shor good news ar'ight; hyuck, hyuck.)
For some perspective, Apple closed 32¢ down today. That's one powerful rumor--a whole -0.37%! The 52 week low is $79.14.
I think the uncertainty of Job's future is already priced into the stock.
Wizard69/Dave: You're all over the place. You argue for a liberal political conspiracy based on "long-known" mortgage troubles and recent improvements in the war in Iraq, while simultaneously acknowledging A) pressures on politicians to make loans affordable, and
Barney Frank got his ass chewed by Bill O'Reilly for the long-known mortgage troubles. But the question is: long-known by who? Some people, yes (you can count BB&T CEO John Allison in that select group, but not Bill O'Reilly; he's just a prick who get's off on belittling people). But liberal politicians? Alan Greenspan was just as clueless. Remember his recent testimony? How can the people who were so stupid on the economy be given the credit of planning the mortgage crisis qua crisis? News flash: politicians get elected by giving stuff away & that seldom pays long term dividends. They did what they always do and the predictable results happened. You're claiming they planned the bust to happen right around election time--at the same time some positive gains were being seen in Iraq--just to further liberal policies? That's nuts. On its face it's nuts; factor in that the presidential election was actually fairly close in terms of the popular vote and it's just crazy nuts.
By the way, for those wondering about me after my Rand reference, I'm a cautious admirer. I hold with Milton Friedman who said this of Rand: "I think she was a fascinating woman and had a great influence. As I always have said, she had an extremely good influence on all those who did not become Randians. But if they became Randians, they were hopeless." (Read his interview with Reason magazine here.) I mention this since AR references can be rather polarizing; I really don't want to get into all that--just sharing an example that came to mind.
I'm sorry, though many people seem to share your view, it is incorrect. It has been repeated ad nauseum that Jobs did not have a typical pancreatic cancer like Randy Paush's. Moreover, Jobs has been declared cancer free. Since you like Wikipedia, please view the link below. Read especially the paragraph toward the bottom about health concerns:
Wikipedia Link for Steve Jobs
It's not the cancer that is Steve's problem. It's the aftermath. Because it was not the typical pancreatic cancer, Jobs waited to have it removed, hoping a special diet would help. Read further about the Whipple procedure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreaticoduodenectomy A major surgery with a high complication and mortality rate that let's just say, is not needed for "healthy" people."A second surgery is often needed to fight infection. Jobs had a second surgery for reasons that were not disclosed. I hope he is as healthy as anyone can be with that procedure. I'm not sure you would ever call your self "fit as a fiddle" though after undergoing all that.
The outrageous views from all sides are frustrating.
1. As fond as I am of the company, Apple has to take the lion's share of the blame for today's events. I would not expect Apple to respond to the Gizmodo rumor, but as I posted at the time (Link), Apple should have done more to head off misinterpretation when they made the MacWorld announcements. A little better effort to communicate on Apple's part could have avoided the initial 6% drop in stock value, as well as all the subsequent fud which has kept the stock down, and encouraged speculation.
2. Apple stock fell nearly $3 within minutes of Gizmodo's rumor. Given that there are something like 890 million shares outstanding, that's well over 2.5 billion dollars of value. Thus, I do hope that the SEC looks into this rumor just as it looked into the false report of Steve Jobs' heart attack in early October. I suspect that they will find a lone teenager here as well, but investigating rumors that cost billions is part of the SEC's job.
To be fair, I don't think it would be unreasonable for the SEC to investigate Steve Jobs' health as well. There are investors who are worried that Apple is not being honest (I'm not among them), and you can bet that some of them have contacted the SEC. With a company as large as Apple it's reasonable that the SEC should be paying attention. The SEC can't babysit every little detail of the marketplace, but it has an important role to play in keeping the market as fair and transparent as possible. It has done a poor job on many fronts over the last decade, and that's part of the reason for the current economic crisis.
3. Gizmodo is no worse or better than most blog sites. But context and tone and other issues are relevant. Gizmodo put this story with a large picture on the front page of their site. The author twice calls attention to the previous reliability of the source. Given the obvious importance of the issue, and the numerous reasons to doubt this rumor (like the fact that Jim Goldman and other mainstream media and analysts have denied that Jobs is ill, and that Apple spokespeople have denied the relevance of Jobs' health to the MacWorld announcements), I think Gizmodo was irresponsible.
4. The drop in stock value turned this rumor into a legitimate news story that merits publication and discussion on Appleinsider, the LA Times, and elsewhere. But moreover, Appleinsider is a different type of site than Gizmodo. The context and tone of Appleinsider generally make it obvious that you should not put too much faith in the rumors. Rumors on Appleinsider do likely contribute to stock trends, but they've never caused a noticeable movement in share value. Maybe that's just luck, or a sign of irrelevance, but it's an important distinction. That's not to say that Appleinsider has a spotless reputation. I've been disappointed with certain articles that have seemed inappropriate for one reason or another, but on the whole I think Appleinsider avoids the type of mistake Gizmodo made. Indeed, AppleInsider's coverage of this rumor which includes a brief history of Jobs' health plus links is quite admirable.
5. The internet is still a wild new territory. The rules for appropriate behavior haven't yet been worked out. This is partially why a rumor like this one merits discussion, and partially why the SEC should be investigating. Everyone on the internet should be conscious of what they're saying and it's effect, and there should be repercussions for egregious offenses. I'm not suggesting that Gizmodo needs to be punished, but I think it would be appropriate if they felt like their reputation has taken a hit from a broader community who disapproves of their behavior.
6. All the speculation about Jobs' health and impending retirement is disgusting. There's no good evidence of either. All signs suggest that he's doing what he loves; Mick Jagger will lead the Stones until he collapses in a heap on the stage, and Jobs will pursue innovative technology until he can't lift his iPhone. And fortunately, in accord with all responsible reports, that's not likely to happen for many years.
7. Apple stock is a phenomenal buy. In contrast to wizard69's pessimism, Apple is firing on all cylinders and it's future looks brighter than ever:
a) Mac sales have been increasing 20-30% per year for the last three years. That's not going to stop. Moreover, Apple is beginning to dominate higher education. As many observers have noted, these young converts will be a fountain of repeat buisness for years to come, and some of them will even bring Apple preferences to the enterprise. It's likely that the current quarter will show a bit of a pause in Mac momentum because of the economy and the fact that so many people are waiting on product refreshes - new Mini, new iMac, and new 17" Macbook Pro. A completely redesigned Mini could be a huge hit.
b) No technology segment is growing faster than smart phones, and Apple has the single most desireable phone on the market. Even if Apple only manages 20% of all smart phones over the next five years, they stand to earn more money off phones than they do off Macs. The iPhone has already generated billions in revenue much of which is not accounted for in aapl's PE. For more details read Andy Zaky's excellent article here on AppleInsider. Link
c) The iPod Touch is creating a whole new market for Apple as a gaming platform/portable computer for a new generation. I could see this coming after my first visit to the app store last summer, but reports all year long have confirmed it. The app store is an astounding success, and once all the kids who received these things for Christmas show them to their friends, we'll realize that the explosion has only begun. The games aren't as complex or readily controllable as those on the DS and the PSP, but for versatility, excitement, affordability and sheer coolness, nothing touches the Touch.
d) Apple has a lead in software and hardware that no one can easily replicate. OS X is an 800 pound gorilla at the center of everything Apple does. Despite the complaints that Apple's current quality does not live up to the mythical perfection of old, Leopard is an extraordinary foundation for growth, and the fact that Apple can work on it to power all their platforms provides a type of economy of scale that no one else can match. In hardware, the iPhone and the Touch are far ahead of the competition, and there's no doubt that Apple intends to keep this lead. We have yet to see the fruits of the PA Semi acquisition.
e) Eventually we will see a tablet or ProTouch or something similar. Apple has the pieces in place, and there's every reason to believe that it could be a huge success.
f) The AppleTV is not dead. It's a product of the future. I've posted on it before, where my main point is that in conjunction with the iPhone/Touch as a remote the AppleTV will eventually come into its own. Link As it is, Apple distributes more paid programming over the iTunes store than any competitor, and discs are a slowly dying technology.
g) What stock would you add to the Dow once you pull a couple carmakers?
Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.
Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.
But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.
The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.
Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.
It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.
Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.
Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.
I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".
Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.
He HAD cancer. He also had a surgery that totally removed it years ago.
[sarcasm]A GIANT of Medical Knowledge walks among us![/sarcasm] (aka indenial irrational Mac fanatic sh!tin' 'self at the prospect of the inevitable demise of his personal Jesus/reason for existence.
Sorry to see you so indenial of Jobs increasingly likely last few weeks (naturally hopefully suffering free) on this earth, that makes you twist and make up Medical FACTS at a rate of knots.
He had surgery to remove a cancerous TUMOUR - which was 100% successful.
"Cancer" is the name of a MEDICAL condition (illness etc) - in terms of physical existence it is NONSENSICAL to state it can be "totally removed" by surgery.
The surgery's aim was to improve the outlook of prognosis - not the irradication of the chance of relapse/cancer return ie "there is currently no cure for cancer"
Pancreatic cancer is a HIGHLY aggressive form of cancer with a corresponding prognosis of a few years if initial surgery is successful. In terms of prognoses there are NO FORMS of 'non-aggressive' cancer of the pancreas - this is clearly FUD spread around by VERY medically ignorant Mac fanatics getting increasingly desperate the closer their comming traumatic (as asociated with their fanatiscism) loss.
Now you can check i'm not bulls*!tin/FUD spreading by cross referencing what i've said with some respectable Medical source(s) <IE NOT wikipedia - since when is that a reliable sole source for facts???
...if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better. ...
There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. ...
It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?
I granted that Apple is likely to see a pause in Mac momentum, but I don't think it will be as severe as you suggest. Let's talk about the current quarter: One thing in Apple's favor is that last year there were no new MacBooks, but this year there are. Reports have put sales of the MacBook up 28% in Oct. (Link) and 22% in November (Link).
I take it that your worry about Mac sales is that NPD said that overall Mac sales were flat for November. They said this because even though Macbooks were up, desktops were down. But in actuality, flat is not bad news since there were 5 fewer shopping days after Thanksgiving in Nov. than last year. If Apple pulled off flat sales overall for November, then they'll likely be up at least slightly for December, and since they were almost certainly up for October, things don't look too shabby. And note, unlike Dell and HP, Apple has done this without lowering prices. Thus Mac revenue should be quite respectable. Moreover, once the new Minis and iMacs are announced, there will be a new sales engine for the March quarter.
IPod sales may be challenging, but the news isn't all bad. It's almost certain that Nanos and Shuffles will be down, but the Touch will be up significantly. The Touch held the top two spots on Amazon for mp3 players for weeks. So, even if total iPod units are down, I'm guessing iPod revenue will increase. Nor should we forget the app store. Revenue from the app store this quarter could be significant, and it's all gravy.
The iPhone sales number is anybody's guess. There are too many variables for informed speculation. But, don't forget that Apple only records 1/8 of the revenue per quarter over a two year period, so sales aren't going to have a significant impact on the bottom line, and the bottom line will benefit from the sales in previous quarters. Of course, any decline in sales will be bad for investor psychology, but really, there's no reliable evidence about what the numbers will be - they could be fine.
The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things. There is too much money out there, and society is too wealthy and humanity too greedy, for commerce as we know it to evaporate. We are experiencing a hiccup in a long term trend of increased production and consumption. I'm not saying that's a good thing, and some day it will come crashing down disastrously, but the cause will be more profound- something like war or disease or climate catastrophe. Moreover, since the 30's, time has sped up. Buisness cycles that may have taken a decade to work themselves out back then, speed by in a flash today. I predict that Apple will not only survive, but thrive.
The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things.
Dude, I admire your optimism but think it is entirely unfounded. We have only seen that start of this puppy, things will get much worse before they get better.
In the US they are just about to report the worst Christmas shopping figures for 40 years!!