"Though Apple is no stranger to SEC investigations, the recent probe is unusual in that it involves the SEC investigating itself."
Transparency is what has been in popular demand. 'Corporate governance' vs 'SEC governance' proves transparency in business is possible. How many corporate boys are making headlines for investigating themselves? SEC investigating itself is a score, not a minus. And, Apple seems to have displayed that nicely.
"Though Apple is no stranger to SEC investigations, the recent probe is unusual in that it involves the SEC investigating itself."
Transparency is what has been in popular demand. 'Corporate governance' vs 'SEC governance' proves transparency in business is possible. How many corporate boys are making headlines for investigating themselves? SEC investigating itself is a score, not a minus. And, Apple seems to have displayed that nicely.
It might be good, but this doesn't sound like a typical audit to me. It sounds like someone trying to find a scapegoat for what may have been a bureaucratic problem. Sounds like this is fallout from an integration disaster or backup failure then finding something while reviewing paper work and questioning employees. If the supervisor was truly being malicious then that is a different story. It just doesn't sound like it to me based on the small amount of information in the article. I don't see how funds could be released for something that was not approved. Maybe this is really a problem with the financial side of SEC.
Ask yourself why every single tech blog is reporting this story as "Apple being investigated by the SEC" when in fact there is no evidence that they are, and no evidence that they did anything untoward at all?
If you read the detail, you find out that the SEC is actually investigating itself, but the headline is "SEC probing Apple."
This is wildly irresponsible "journalism."
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
"link bait" and "irresponsible journalism" are being used allot around here lately. I kind of have to agree. bummer. \
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas
exactly..... this article is so confusing written....
Well, we all know Apple is one top dog nowadays so it goes without saying if you want to be heard, include Apple name on all your stories regardless the relationship. It just shows that no one can command attention like Apple can. Samsung? Microsoft? Pah!
It might be good, but this doesn't sound like a typical audit to me. It sounds like someone trying to find a scapegoat for what may have been a bureaucratic problem. Sounds like this is fallout from an integration disaster or backup failure then finding something while reviewing paper work and questioning employees. If the supervisor was truly being malicious then that is a different story. It just doesn't sound like it to me based on the small amount of information in the article. I don't see how funds could be released for something that was not approved. Maybe this is really a problem with the financial side of SEC.
I can't begin to understand what this is about. An "Apple salesman" sold the SEC on some third party solution that didn't work out? And the SEC didn't follow internal guidelines regarding bidding? And so Apple is under investigation? What?
You can't understand the article because the actual events have been highly edited to make it appear Apple did nothing wrong. Key details missing from this AI article include:
● Apple had links to Cloverleaf
● Apple made a large number of additional purchases on behalf of the SEC. These purchases were done without going through the usual approval process.
I think, at this point, the AI bloggers are qualified for a job with The Huffington Post.
You can't understand the article because the actual events have been highly edited to make it appear Apple did nothing wrong. Key details missing from this AI article include:
● Apple had links to Cloverleaf
● Apple made a large number of additional purchases on behalf of the SEC. These purchases were done without going through the usual approval process.
I think, at this point, the AI bloggers are qualified for a job with The Huffington Post.
Unless this is followed by some bribery or undue influence claim against Apple or one of it's reps, the story really seems to be about SEC issues rather than Apple's.
Unless this is followed by some bribery or undue influence claim against Apple or one of it's reps, the story really seems to be about SEC issues rather than Apple's.
Hence the reason for the investigation.
But reading only the AI article, you have no idea why Apple was included in the investigation.
Apple's role is they delivered a service they were paid for. Apple doesn't bribe anyone. If there was mismanagement at the SEC why bring Apple in except to create sensationalist headlines?
Nobody likes sensationalist headlines. They also attract trolls that don't read farther then the headline. Although admittedly some of the other Apple News sites were worse on this one.
Who would listen to an "Apple salesman" regarding an enterprise storage solution? Maybe they get their catering guidance from the barrista at Starbucks too.
Probably was actually a Sales Engineer. They have a technical background.
I can't begin to understand what this is about. An "Apple salesman" sold the SEC on some third party solution that didn't work out? And the SEC didn't follow internal guidelines regarding bidding? And so Apple is under investigation? What?
That part does seem weird.
I can only venture that they went to Apple about the whole thing and the contact person said something like "that's not really something that we can do for ya. You should try a 3rd party place like uh, Cloverleaf." Fully expecting that person to do their own due diligence.
Such things could be why Apple refuses to name particular locations for anything. If you ask their Geniuses about places for repairs they can't/won't do they hand you a list of local Apple certified shops. But they won't name any one of them as the place to go. Creates liability. (Or at least that is the policy)
Comments
exactly..... this article is so confusing written....
Transparency is what has been in popular demand. 'Corporate governance' vs 'SEC governance' proves transparency in business is possible. How many corporate boys are making headlines for investigating themselves? SEC investigating itself is a score, not a minus. And, Apple seems to have displayed that nicely.
"Though Apple is no stranger to SEC investigations, the recent probe is unusual in that it involves the SEC investigating itself."
Transparency is what has been in popular demand. 'Corporate governance' vs 'SEC governance' proves transparency in business is possible. How many corporate boys are making headlines for investigating themselves? SEC investigating itself is a score, not a minus. And, Apple seems to have displayed that nicely.
It might be good, but this doesn't sound like a typical audit to me. It sounds like someone trying to find a scapegoat for what may have been a bureaucratic problem. Sounds like this is fallout from an integration disaster or backup failure then finding something while reviewing paper work and questioning employees. If the supervisor was truly being malicious then that is a different story. It just doesn't sound like it to me based on the small amount of information in the article. I don't see how funds could be released for something that was not approved. Maybe this is really a problem with the financial side of SEC.
The U.S. Securities Exchange Commission
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ...
kee ryst. my first born for just one well crafted article out of this blog ...
Ask yourself why every single tech blog is reporting this story as "Apple being investigated by the SEC" when in fact there is no evidence that they are, and no evidence that they did anything untoward at all?
If you read the detail, you find out that the SEC is actually investigating itself, but the headline is "SEC probing Apple."
This is wildly irresponsible "journalism."
"link bait" and "irresponsible journalism" are being used allot around here lately. I kind of have to agree. bummer.
exactly..... this article is so confusing written....
Well, we all know Apple is one top dog nowadays so it goes without saying if you want to be heard, include Apple name on all your stories regardless the relationship. It just shows that no one can command attention like Apple can. Samsung? Microsoft? Pah!
It might be good, but this doesn't sound like a typical audit to me. It sounds like someone trying to find a scapegoat for what may have been a bureaucratic problem. Sounds like this is fallout from an integration disaster or backup failure then finding something while reviewing paper work and questioning employees. If the supervisor was truly being malicious then that is a different story. It just doesn't sound like it to me based on the small amount of information in the article. I don't see how funds could be released for something that was not approved. Maybe this is really a problem with the financial side of SEC.
One thing's for sure..inquiring minds wanna know.
I can't begin to understand what this is about. An "Apple salesman" sold the SEC on some third party solution that didn't work out? And the SEC didn't follow internal guidelines regarding bidding? And so Apple is under investigation? What?
You can't understand the article because the actual events have been highly edited to make it appear Apple did nothing wrong. Key details missing from this AI article include:
● Apple had links to Cloverleaf
● Apple made a large number of additional purchases on behalf of the SEC. These purchases were done without going through the usual approval process.
I think, at this point, the AI bloggers are qualified for a job with The Huffington Post.
You can't understand the article because the actual events have been highly edited to make it appear Apple did nothing wrong. Key details missing from this AI article include:
● Apple had links to Cloverleaf
● Apple made a large number of additional purchases on behalf of the SEC. These purchases were done without going through the usual approval process.
I think, at this point, the AI bloggers are qualified for a job with The Huffington Post.
Unless this is followed by some bribery or undue influence claim against Apple or one of it's reps, the story really seems to be about SEC issues rather than Apple's.
Unless this is followed by some bribery or undue influence claim against Apple or one of it's reps, the story really seems to be about SEC issues rather than Apple's.
Hence the reason for the investigation.
But reading only the AI article, you have no idea why Apple was included in the investigation.
9
Just the SEC?!?
What about the ACC? The Big Ten? The Ivy League? The Pac-10? This is an outrage!
Pac-12
My favorite has always been the WAC
I see teckstuds hand in this !!!
9
Actually, DaHarder bought 9 of these Cloverleaf thingies -- for each member of his family.!
...I can hardly wait to see the pictures...
even violating FTC regs by not including disclaimers in reviews where they provide links to collect commissions.
You have fuckin' lost it!
Nobody likes sensationalist headlines. They also attract trolls that don't read farther then the headline. Although admittedly some of the other Apple News sites were worse on this one.
Who would listen to an "Apple salesman" regarding an enterprise storage solution? Maybe they get their catering guidance from the barrista at Starbucks too.
Probably was actually a Sales Engineer. They have a technical background.
I can't begin to understand what this is about. An "Apple salesman" sold the SEC on some third party solution that didn't work out? And the SEC didn't follow internal guidelines regarding bidding? And so Apple is under investigation? What?
That part does seem weird.
I can only venture that they went to Apple about the whole thing and the contact person said something like "that's not really something that we can do for ya. You should try a 3rd party place like uh, Cloverleaf." Fully expecting that person to do their own due diligence.
Such things could be why Apple refuses to name particular locations for anything. If you ask their Geniuses about places for repairs they can't/won't do they hand you a list of local Apple certified shops. But they won't name any one of them as the place to go. Creates liability. (Or at least that is the policy)