I'm sorry, but I can't get around it any more. Over the weekend, we had a story in the reputable Wall Street Journal that Steve Jobs had a liver transplant two months ago in a hospital in Tennessee. This story got all over the Apple media - obviously - and was later confirmed by the hospital in question. All the usual questions arose about privacy, Warren Buffet had a remark about it, and so on. Let's get all these stories out of the way in one go.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-03-20
And you see no problem of not being aware of the risk of applying such a plan or the probable success rate of this ? As a shareholder ?
Member since:2009-06-24
Any shareholder that doesn't, as part of their due-diligence, discover that Jobs is or could be considered a key contributor to the success of AAPL and who also doesn't appropriately weight the risk of that information, is a poor investor and an idiot.
If Jobs got hit by a truck, I bet shareholders would wonder what the hell he was doing crossing the street.
The fact remains that the burden is on the INVESTOR to weigh the risks of buying into a company like AAPL where Jobs is a key component to it's success. Just like buying a pharma stock on speculation that they'll be awarded a patent for a cancer curing drug carries a specified amount of risk, as does this.
As such, AAPL DID announce Jobs had health problems and was going to be stepping down for some time, they DID fully disclose EVERYTHING that was required for a shareholder to make an informed decision on whether to dump their shares of AAPL or not.
Case closed, Thom and Buffett are both wrong.
I created an osnews account just to post this, so hopefully someone will read it. 
Member since:2005-07-06
And you see no problem of not being aware of the risk of applying such a plan or the probable success rate of this ? As a shareholder ?
I think twm bucket is very pragmatic about it. Apple had a CEO sitting, so whether Steve Jobs had a liver transplant or was abducted by aliens is immaterial.
I think Apple would do well to decouple the perception of Steve Jobs = Apple as soon as possible. Steve Jobs is a mortal being and having the companies health be dependent on the existence of a frail human being (we are all frail) is asking for trouble. Mr. Jobs is going to die one day. Hopefully in the distant future.
If Apple can't shake the Apple = Jobs image, the death of Jobs will kill Apple. So drop your Apple stock people, because Apple is a middle aged mortal entity, which will end with an epitaph on Mr. Jobs head stone.
Member since:2008-12-29
Something no one seems to have mentioned so far, what would have happened to apple stock if it had been announced? It would have plummeted, making shareholders stocks worth a lot lot less, so it could be argued if you don't agree that it was/is a purely private matter that not mentioning it was in the best interest of the shareholders.
Member since:
2008-10-09
I own 500 shares. Steve Jobs took a medical leave and handed over the reigns of the company. I don't see the problem since he wasn't working and if he couldn't return, Apple had a plan in place.