×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The SEC Is Getting Closer To Jobs

kdawson posted about 7 years ago | from the bigger-fish dept.

Businesses 154

Strudelkugel writes "CNN is reporting that Apple's ex-CFO warned Steve Jobs about backdating options. From the article: 'Apple's former finance chief Fred Anderson blamed Apple CEO Steve Jobs for a 2001 stock option grant that was backdated, according to a statement from Anderson's lawyer released Tuesday. The statement was released by Anderson's lawyer, Jerome Roth, after Anderson settled with the Securities and Exchange Commission related to Apple's stock option plan without admitting or denying any wrongdoing.' This is serious business. It is quite possible that the SEC could someday require Jobs to resign from Apple."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

154 comments

GNAA announces switch to Windows Vista (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862297)

GNAA announces switch to Windows Vista

fellacious (GNAP) Intercourse, PA - Windows Vista appears to finally be taking off, at least within one Fortune 100 company. The GNAA had for the past 13 years been using Red Hat Linux and it's successor, Fedora Core, but growing discontent with the free software operating system forced CTO Jmax to declare on Wednesday that the company was to be switching its entire infrastructure to the new version of Windows, effective immediately. "I'm not going to theatrically claim that I wasn't expecting to have to do this," Jmax said. "This has been coming for quite some time." The GNAA's troubles with Red Hat's Linux system included chronic governance problems, a persistent failure to maintain key repositories, a complex and undocumented submission process which has kept the GNAA's free trolling utilities off the Red Hat-based desktops of thousands of would-be trolls, inability to keep RPM up to date, and a failure to address the problem of Firefox not crashing a entire computer when the user loads Last Measure. "The deal-breaker, though, was when a key Last Measure server remained down for four hours while our entire Intercourse development team tried desperately to bring it up despite not having statically-linked package manager binaries." What had happened was Dikky, visiting from Norway, wanted to play the child pornography mod of Doom 3 on that server- which had to drag several libraries with it. "In addition," said Jmax, "several key software applications used in the GNAA's corporate workflow are proprietary software- which means that they had to be run in an Ubuntu compatibility environment anyway." However, being as those unnamed applications were written in C#.NET, "We expect that our transition to Windows Vista will come off without a hitch."

About Jmax:

The CTO of the GNAA, Jmax also has a seat on Microsoft's board of directors. His resume can be accessed at http://goatse.fr/ [goatse.fr] .

About Windows Vista:

The fastest-growing desktop operating system on the market, Windows Vista combines the legendary security of Windows 98 with the legendary ease of use of those computer interfaces you see in the movies into one ultra-fast, ultra-stable computing platform.

About Red Hat:

A failure of a computer company, Red Hat burns through investor money while giving its products away for free. It is currently under investigation from the SEC for misuse of invested funds, and being sued by the GNAA for breach of contract for sucking more than specified in the GNAA's contract with Red Hat.

About the Linux community:

Trolled.



About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [mugshots.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
  • First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it. You can download the movie [idge.net] (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
  • Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post [wikipedia.org] on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website.
  • Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link [irc] if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

.________________________________________________.
| ______________________________________._a,____ | Press contact:
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ | Gary Niger
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ | gary_niger@gnaa.us [mailto]
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ | GNAA Corporate Headquarters
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ | 143 Rolloffle Avenue
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ | Tarzana, California 91356
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ | All other inquiries:
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ | Enid Al-Punjabi
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ | enid_al_punjabi@gnaa.us [mailto]
| ______-"!^____________________________________ | GNAA World Headquarters
` _______________________________________________' 160-0023 Japan Tokyo-to Shinjuku-ku Nishi-Shinjuku 3-20-2

Copyright (c) 2003-2007 Gay Nigger Association of America [www.gnaa.us]

Hmmm (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862303)

I guess they found something queer about his actions...

This is a good thing. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862309)

Just like AIDS, this attack on the homosexual community is a gift from God and it should be treated as such.

Apple without Jobs (2)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 years ago | (#18862325)

Bring on the iPod clones!
The iMac clones!
The Powerbook clones!

Ring the death knell, only Steve Jobs has imagination. Oh no!

He can still run it from the shadows.

Re:Apple without Jobs (5, Informative)

JQuick (411434) | about 7 years ago | (#18863069)

CNN is not reporting the whole story.

Yes, Fred Anderson's lawyer did claim that he had warned Job's about the issue in 2001, and implied that Job's had misled Anderson.

However, in a press release today, the SEC made several statements that flatly contradict the CNN story.

The SEC said it isn't bringing enforcement action against Apple "based in part on its swift, extensive, and extraordinary cooperation in the commission's investigation."

They also stated that, "Apple's cooperation consisted of, among other things, prompt self-reporting, an independent internal investigation, the sharing of the results of that investigation with the government, and the implementation of new controls designed to prevent the recurrence of fraudulent conduct."

In short, the SEC stance appears to be that Anderson and Apple's former general counsel Nancy Heinen had the direct responsibility to review the board's decisions in this matter and make sure that Apple complied with reporting requirements. The SEC publicly stated that they are not bringing any action against Apple, they have settled with Anderson already, and will continue prosecuting Heinen (since she has chosen to fight the charges against her.

This is poor reporting on CNNs part, not a real story.

Re:Apple without Jobs (1)

qbwiz (87077) | about 7 years ago | (#18863693)

The SEC said it isn't bringing enforcement action against Apple


Contrary to popular belief, Steve Jobs is not, in fact, Apple. There was a period of many years when Steve Jobs was not associated at all with Apple. If they actually do go to court against Jobs (and not Apple), there may be another period of many years when he won't be associated with Apple.

Re:Apple without Jobs (2, Insightful)

iocat (572367) | about 7 years ago | (#18864157)

There was a period of many years when Steve Jobs was not associated at all with Apple

Yeah, when Apple sucked. I'm not saying Jobs would have done a better job than Scully and his sucessors, but they certainly managed to do an awful job, and simply coast on the "cool" that Jobs and Woz lent to the company.

BUT! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862343)

But... but.. M$/DRM bad, Apple/Linux good!

Apple/Linux good!

More Likely than Resignation (4, Insightful)

Stanistani (808333) | about 7 years ago | (#18862345)

If Jobs has a good lawyer, and doesn't make the 'Martha Stewart' mistake of lying to federal investigators, then the worst thing that will happen to him is a hole in his wallet.

Re:More Likely than Resignation (4, Informative)

russotto (537200) | about 7 years ago | (#18862567)

Right. Here's the ONLY thing Steve Jobs should be saying to Federal Investigators:

Jobs has nothing to worry about (4, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | about 7 years ago | (#18863907)

I think you'll find Jobs' Reality Distortion Field is just as effective on investigators and lawyers as it is on your average computer user.

Re:More Likely than Resignation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18864577)

Yeah, like "Free iPods for all investigators!"

Re:More Likely than Resignation (5, Interesting)

wass (72082) | about 7 years ago | (#18862889)

It also looks like Fred Anderson is also trying to stab back at Apple after their own internal investigation pointed to him and another former employee Heinen, after these two were let go. Apple claimed these two executives acted improperly, and now that Anderson settled with the SEC (and lost a bunch of time and cash in the process) he's trying to strike back.

See this article [chron.com] and this other article [law.com] from back in January. Interesting that back in January, from the article, Anderson's statement is

And last week, a lawyer for Fred Anderson, Apple's former CFO, released a prepared statement that his client "did not play any day-to-day role in the granting, reporting, and accounting of stock options and he was not involved in any knowing manipulation of the process."

Yet, now having claimed he knew that Jobs was awarded or considering these backdated options, he would either violated his SEC ethics obligations, or was so insanely incompetent he should have been fired anyway. So by settling with the SEC he basically admits he did act improperly. It's obvious he most likely lied (or sneakily phrased his statement) back in January.

In light of this contradiction, why should anyone trust his word now?

Re:More Likely than Resignation (1)

w42w42 (538630) | about 7 years ago | (#18864403)

See this article and this other article from back in January. Interesting that back in January, from the article, Anderson's statement is

And last week, a lawyer for Fred Anderson, Apple's former CFO, released a prepared statement that his client "did not play any day-to-day role in the granting, reporting, and accounting of stock options and he was not involved in any knowing manipulation of the process."
Yet, now having claimed he knew that Jobs was awarded or considering these backdated options, he would either violated his SEC ethics obligations, or was so insanely incompetent he should have been fired anyway. So by settling with the SEC he basically admits he did act improperly. It's obvious he most likely lied (or sneakily phrased his statement) back in January.

Excellent points. My vote is that he lied - by ommission. Of course he had nothing to do with the day to day role of granting stock options, that is for the hired help. It can almost be guaranteed though that he knew exactly what high level managers were getting, especially if there was a question of legality. Like you said, he was either grossly imcompetent, or he's not being honest.

The fact that he is pretty much contradicting himself to get back at Jobs blows me away though ...

Re:More Likely than Resignation (5, Funny)

Tickletaint (1088359) | about 7 years ago | (#18863637)

"No, Your Honor, I guess I just see things differently."

"I'm a misfit. A rebel. A troublemaker. I admit it."

"I'm not fond of rules. And I have no respect for the status quo."

Jobs resigns and other penulties (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862363)

This is serious business. It is quite possible that the SEC could someday require Jobs to resign from Apple
If there is any justice in this wrld they will also make him pay child support for his daughter Lisa.

Re:Jobs resigns and other penulties (1)

El Gigante de Justic (994299) | about 7 years ago | (#18862661)

From what I can find about his daughter, I don't see this as likely considering: A) She's soon to turn 29 B) From what I can see she spent at least part of her child hood living with Jobs and his wife (her step-mother)

Shreeeek (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862393)

Jobs may or may not have violated the SEC's regulations but he's hardly what I would call a bad guy. This backdated option stuff was almost industry standard and, when it started, wasn't exactly illegal. OK, so it wasn't exactly legal either but corporate lawyers were giving it the OK. The guys at RIM are getting tarred with the same brush and as far as I can tell, they did nothing wrong. The question should be asked: "Did these individuals get any money to which they weren't otherwise entitled?" If not, get off their case.

The SEC should spend some time going after some real bad guys: SCO for instance.

so justice is for everyone, except good guys? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862651)

and since an entire industry was doing it, it makes it ok?

i dont think thats what america is supposed to be about. rich people should not be able to steal millions while the poor are locked in jail for years for stealing a few hundred.

Probably a standard, overblown scare (5, Insightful)

SashaM (520334) | about 7 years ago | (#18862399)

You can see from today's AAPL chart [yahoo.com] that the average investor thinks this overblown. The dip and the quick recovery occurred when the news about this accusation came out.

Re:Probably a standard, overblown scare (4, Insightful)

maeka (518272) | about 7 years ago | (#18862671)

You can see from today's AAPL chart that the average investor thinks this overblown. The dip and the quick recovery occurred when the news about this accusation came out.


That stock price chart merely reflects that the market hates uncertainty, the announcement of anticipated news always brings an up tick, as uncertainty is removed.

The uncertainty, in this case, was on possible "smoking guns" revealed as part of Fred Anderson's settlement. There were none, his "punishment" was minimal, and as soon as the market processed this information the temporary downturn (during the period of imperfect information when traders are unsure if they have the full story) reversed and Apple's stock went higher than opening.

Re:Probably a standard, overblown scare (1)

dekkerdreyer (1007957) | about 7 years ago | (#18864851)

I felt a great disturbance in the market, as if millions of speculators suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

Doubtful... (1)

Mockylock (1087585) | about 7 years ago | (#18862421)

I can't see them asking him to step down, before he straight-up hands over the reigns to someone else before shit hits the fan.

I say nail him to the cross if he's guilty (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862433)

Like Martha Stewert, what the hell do they have to gain by doing this? They are already as rich as anyone needs to be. His net gain is probably the equivalent of me finding a penny on the street.

I'm not convinced either are guilty (1, Interesting)

Cadallin (863437) | about 7 years ago | (#18862705)

Its a Republican hatchet job, just like Martha Stewart. She was sent to jail over $50,000. She's worth what? Tens of millions, Hundreds, Billions? Do you really believed she intended to defraud share holders out of a pissy 50 grand? Personally, I think she sold some stock to buy a new car, or remodel her house or buy a painting or something, that is she just wanted some pocket change, and sold the stock without any consideration of what was going on. Which isn't illegal.

Note that this whole Apple stock "scandal" is about something that isn't even illegal. The only thing they did wrong was to file taxes on the stock issues incorrectly, which is wrong, BUT they self reported to the SEC and the IRS. There absolutely no evidence of any intentional wrongdoing.

I say both are more related to the US Attorney purge than anything else. The Chair of the SEC is trying to "do his job" by applying heat to prominent liberal democrat contributors (which stewart, and jobs and Apple are). That's what I think is going on.

mnb Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862731)

You don't get rich by turning down "free" money.

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (1)

paeanblack (191171) | about 7 years ago | (#18862825)

Its a Republican hatchet job, just like Martha Stewart. She was sent to jail over $50,000. She's worth what? Tens of millions, Hundreds, Billions? Do you really believed she intended to defraud share holders out of a pissy 50 grand?

Yes, of course she did. She just did not consider it fraud.

Do you really think most wealthy people get and remain wealthy by staying well within the boundaries of both the spirit and letter of the law? No, they push the envelopes, legal and otherwise. The grass is greener where fewer graze, and all that.

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (2, Informative)

afidel (530433) | about 7 years ago | (#18862869)

The funny thing about the Stuart case is she COULDN'T have been charged with insider trading since she doesn't fit the definition of an insider (in the company she had traded in), only her friend could have been harmed. It was her lying and instructing others to lie that got her in trouble.

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18864143)

I believe that insider trading applies to making trades based on information not available through public channels. So you don't have to be an executive in a company to make an "insider" trade, you just need to make the trade based on information from someone who is an insider. You could, for instance be a lawyer who finds out about a pending lawsuit before it becomes public. Or just be an executive's "good friend" who finds out about a lousy quarter before results for it are announced publicly.

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (1, Flamebait)

Moridineas (213502) | about 7 years ago | (#18863061)

You may recall that little thing called enron, that had a lot of people calling for blood of ANY financial misdoings?

Personally, I think Martha serving jail time was a bit silly...on the other hand, do you know what she was convicted of? It was not insider trading, it was multiple counts of lying to investigators and obstruction of justice. Just like Scooter libby. Just like Bill Clinton. Are we seeing a pattern here? It's a bad idea to lie to police/investigators/under oath/etc!!

In addition, you misrepresent the Apple situation. This isn't just filing taxes incorrectly--which you make sound like a simple accident. Currently they are investigating minutes of boardroom meetings being fully made up--reocrds of meetings that never occurred. Falsification of documents. That seems like a pretty big deal.. But hey, we should probably go easy on big corporations right--at least the ones we like, like Apple??

I like how you make this a partisan problem too... I'm sure if a famous Republican lied to investigators about insider trading and obstructed justice, you would be absolutely as convinced that they were persecuted unfairly. It seems like according to you, Republicans are damned if they do, damned if they don't (and that's assuming that this is a political issue at all!). Don't investigate illegal corporate doings--it's just those fat cat corrupt washington republicans. But if they DO investigate illegal corporate doings--why they're just attacking their political enemies. Give me a break!

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (1)

good soldier svejk (571730) | about 7 years ago | (#18863789)

do you know what she was convicted of? It was not insider trading, it was multiple counts of lying to investigators and obstruction of justice. Just like Scooter libby. Just like Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton was convicted of lying to investigators and obstruction of justice? When did that happen? I remember him being acquitted of perjury and obstruction of justice by a 55-45 vote in the US Senate.

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (1)

Moridineas (213502) | about 7 years ago | (#18863839)

Ok, I will except that amendment to my statement--Bill Clinton GOT IN TROUBLE for doing the exact same kind of things.

Rather pedantic though, everyone knows he was acquitted, and everyone knows that perjury was what brought about the whole impeachment thing...

Re:I'm not convinced either are guilty (2, Informative)

good soldier svejk (571730) | about 7 years ago | (#18864013)

everyone knows that perjury was what brought about the whole impeachment thing...
There was no perjury. Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Starr's questions about Clinton's consensual relationship with Lewinsky was not material to the Paula Jones case. Not only was Clinton not convicted, he was never criminally charged.

Fun trivia about the Jones case: Judge Susan Weber Wright was a law student of Bill Clinton's at the University of Arkansas. While teaching her Admiralty Law class he lost several student's final exams, including hers. He gave them the choice of retaking the exam or getting a B, which I think is ridiculous. He should have just given them As. She took the B and was justifiably unhappy about it. I think she filed a grievance with the university. Still, she saw her way clear issuing a summary judgement in his favor when she found the Jones case to be without legal merit.

Re:I say nail him to the cross if he's guilty (1)

Nymz (905908) | about 7 years ago | (#18862729)

Like Martha Stewert, what the hell do they have to gain by doing this? They are already as rich as anyone needs to be. His net gain is probably the equivalent of me finding a penny on the street.

He didn't get to where he is now by himself. The very same club of "friends" that helped him, will require that he continues to "go along". Jobs is no Serpico [imdb.com]

Sensationalist crap (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862445)

"This is serious business. It is quite possible that the SEC could someday require Jobs to resign from Apple."

Thank you for your editorial...

Re:Sensationalist crap (0)

Bill Walker (835082) | about 7 years ago | (#18863559)

Yeah, no kidding. In fact, it isn't at all possible that the SEC could require Jobs to resign from Apple. They could fine Jobs, or ban him from working in the financial industry, but they can't force him to quit his position at Apple. Maybe the IRS could get him on tax evasion, since they may feel he should have reported options received at a strike below market value as income, provided they vested that year.

SEC can ban people from being Officers & Direc (4, Informative)

Steve Hamlin (29353) | about 7 years ago | (#18863781)


As background: I'm a forensic accountant, do large financial investigations of public companies, and am currently doing a stock option investigation. I do not have any inside knowledge of the issues at Apple.

In fact, it isn't at all possible that the SEC could require Jobs to resign from Apple.

Not true at all. The SEC has fairly broad powers to permanently ban a person from serving as director or officer of a public registrant.

Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act. See: http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2003/0303/featur es/f031803.htm [nysscpa.org]

I'm free to take questions!

Re:SEC can ban people from being Officers & Di (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | about 7 years ago | (#18863933)

Consultant? I recall he was brought in on that note - SEC bar that as well?

still cutting corners... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862447)

there was some biography of apple and/or jobs one time. someone who knew jobs was amazed by his disregard for normal rules, ie, when they were running laps, jobs would cut the corners. personally i didnt understand why this was amazing. we all did it in soccer practice.

  but it makes me feel like i understand a little bit of his personality, how he could scam woz out of a few grand back in the day, how he gets sweatshops to churn out ipods, and how he could backdate stock options. its almost like a shakesperian fatal flaw ... in a way the brazenness and drive are what gives jobs the ability to make his company work, but the closely associated characteristics, so close as to be hard to separate, of hubris and arrogance, could also be his downfall.

And then he'll be right back (4, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | about 7 years ago | (#18862457)

As an extravagantly paid consultant. Who in their right mind thinks that they're going to let him go, unless the law puts a total barrier between Apple and Jobs?

Re:And then he'll be right back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863233)

Or maybe he'll start another company, then get absorbed by Apple as a designer thus restarting some sort of bizarre cycle...perhaps the Jobs Phenomenon (Larf). All while Jonathan Ive runs the company from a keynote presentation Jobs left behind.

I know what else is serious business. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862463)

The internet is serious business.

Re:I know what else is serious business. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862551)

O RLY?

Despite it all (4, Interesting)

ShooterNeo (555040) | about 7 years ago | (#18862485)

Despite all our criticisms as techno-nerds about Steve Job's "reality distortion field", I think that we can agree that this man is the best person to remain head of Apple. One might argue that he is overpaid, but, with that said, this man can sell their products like no other. I think his fate should be to pay back whatever ill-begotten gains this dirty trick gained him, plus fines, and he should remain in his current position.

Re:Despite it all (1, Informative)

mrdaveb (239909) | about 7 years ago | (#18862555)

One might argue that he is overpaid

His salary is $1 per year... I don't think anyone is going to argue he is overpaid

Re:Despite it all (3, Interesting)

MalleusEBHC (597600) | about 7 years ago | (#18862653)

His salary is $1 per year... I don't think anyone is going to argue he is overpaid


His salary may only be $1, but he received about $8 million worth of options last year. The $1 salary is purely symbolic now.

And for the record, Jobs is easily worth millions to the company. There's no way Apple would be where it is without him, and he is worth every penny they give him.

Re:Despite it all (2, Interesting)

afidel (530433) | about 7 years ago | (#18862849)

Jobs is one of those relatively rare CEOs who's worth whatever compensation the board decides to give him. Apple was literally on the verge of collapse when he returned to the helm with investors talking about liquidating the company being a real option. He's a lot like Jack Welsh in his ability to lead the people and see the market and future for the company.

Re:Despite it all (4, Funny)

catbutt (469582) | about 7 years ago | (#18863361)

The $1 salary is purely symbolic now.
A few years ago, of course, Jobs needed the money and the extra dollar a year came in handy.

Re:Despite it all (4, Informative)

StikyPad (445176) | about 7 years ago | (#18862813)

I think a few people might... [wikipedia.org]

His current salary at Apple officially remains US$1 per year, although he has traditionally been the recipient of a number of lucrative "executive gifts" from the board, including a US$46 million jet in 1999 and just under 30 million shares of restricted stock in 2000-2002. As such, Jobs is well compensated for his efforts at Apple despite the nominal one-dollar salary. This approach reduces his personal tax liability because, under current U.S. tax law, salary income is taxed at a significantly higher rate (currently up to 35%) than the capital gains tax (currently a maximum of 15%) applied to profits arising from the sale of stock grants. Obtaining remuneration through stock instead of salary is a common extrinsic rewarding technique which ties management performance to financial benefits. Furthermore, it acts as a tax minimization strategy.

Re:Despite it all (3, Interesting)

wass (72082) | about 7 years ago | (#18862961)

Jobs didn't gain ANYTHING from this deal, he never exercised the backdated options.

As someone else pointed out, his salary is $1 per year, but of course he owns significant shares of Apple, Pixar, and other stocks where the real money is made.

Since Jobs never exercised the options, his only guilt in this scam is in having been awarded the options by his company (where the options backdating was approved by Anderson himself who's making the accusation now).

It's kind of like your friend giving you a forged check from a rich person's account, and then him getting busted for writing these forged checks. Since he's busted he wants to claim you as an accomplice, even though you never cashed that check.

Re:Despite it all (3, Informative)

aczisny (871332) | about 7 years ago | (#18863399)

That not quite true. The options were converted to restricted Apple stock for the same value as the options were currently worth. If the options had been granted later, presumably he would have been given a lot less restricted stock than he otherwise was. The Washington Post had an article [washingtonpost.com] about it on January 11th.

So you're correct that he never exercised the options, but he gained in a big way when they were converted to a restricted stock grant of their approximate value.

Re:Despite it all (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | about 7 years ago | (#18863945)

I think that we can agree that this man is the best person to remain head of Apple.
Well, certainly we can agree to that, since he's the only one who can feasibly do it. Any other option is grammatically impossible.

Re:Despite it all (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | about 7 years ago | (#18863967)

Err, I typed this in a hurry. Meant to have 2 paragraphs as well, but you know, post early to get the positive moderation.

Anyhow, how would I write it correctly, to express the idea that Mr. Jobs should not be forced to leave his post?

Re:Despite it all (1)

Wordplay (54438) | about 7 years ago | (#18864399)

"I think that we can agree that this man is the best person to be head of Apple."

No previous state implied.

Re:Despite it all (3, Insightful)

Paradise Pete (33184) | about 7 years ago | (#18864721)

I typed this in a hurry. Meant to have 2 paragraphs as well, but you know, post early to get the positive moderation

Yes, because it's much more important to have three or four random people mod you up than it is to clearly and articulately get your point across.

jobs probably won't be fired (5, Informative)

k2enemy (555744) | about 7 years ago | (#18862517)

Jobs probably won't be forced to quit by the SEC. From today's WSJ coverage:

"The SEC said it will not pursue any further action against Apple itself, which cooperated fully with the probe"

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (0, Redundant)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 7 years ago | (#18863079)

Jobs probably won't be forced to quit by the SEC.


It would be a very bad day for Apple investors if Jobs is forced to resign - honestly, he's done a lot for revitalizing Apple in the last 10 years he's been around (iMac practically saved the company, and iPods are doing relatively well). It's hard to argue that public interest is served by firing Jobs and hiring some other person in his place (everyone else who tried has failed).

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863105)

Firing Jobs would be good for Apple. He's no better than Gates, and there is no need for a cult of personality. He's a pompous ass who takes credit for other's work. I'm sure they could find another frontman who would be perhaps a bit more ethical.

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863311)

The only thing more pathetic than a PC enthusiast is a PC enthusiast trying to understand Mac culture. We have a name for you people: tragic fucktards.

There's a good reason for your vexation at the Mac community's adoration of Steve Jobs as not only our cultural figurehead, but our leader in matters of aesthetics and user interaction design: You don't speak our language. Remember that the Mac was designed by artists [atspace.com] , for artists [atspace.com] , be they poets [atspace.com] , musicians [atspace.com] , or avant-garde mathematicians [atspace.com] . A shiny new copy of MacDirectory [macdirectory.com] can introduce your frathouse hovel to a modicum of good taste, but it can't make intuitive Apple watchers out of dweebs [atspace.com] and squares [atspace.com] like you.

So don't force what doesn't come naturally. You'll be much happier if you stick to blind love of an OS that suits your personality. And you'll be doing the rest of us a favor, too; you leave Macs to Mac users, and we'll leave beige to you.

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863347)

That's funny considering I've owned Macs for the past six years...and yes I'm the same AC that you replied to. Jobs is an ass and I've always disliked him; I'm sorry your hero worship has gone to such extremes.

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863501)

So you fail, one, to recognize sincerity, and two, to reward good taste with your allegiance—no matter whether this callous vulgarity stems from a beige-blunted discernment or a general, habitual douchebaggery to make Sanjaya proud—and yet you have the gall to call yourself a Mac user.

Get the fuck off my platform, poseur.

Re:jobs probably won't be fired (1)

walter_f (889353) | about 7 years ago | (#18863191)

"The SEC said it will not pursue any further action against Apple itself, which cooperated fully with the probe"

Note the term "Apple itself" which means Apple as a company.

Steve Jobs, contrary to what many people seem to believe, is still a different entity. ;-)

So there will be probably further action against Jobs himself.

Microsoft is behind it (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862583)

Who else would have paid SEC officers to look into Apple?

Gutless SEC (1)

RiffRafff (234408) | about 7 years ago | (#18862615)

They'll lose no time going after Jobs for piddlin' crap, but will they touch SCO for their OBVIOUS pump 'n' dump stock scam? Nooooo...

Gutless wienies.

Jobs could always... (3, Funny)

N8F8 (4562) | about 7 years ago | (#18862673)

Run for President, fix the economy, the political system and world strife then pardon himself. He's got my vote.

Re:Jobs could always... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862743)

I'm sure he's pro-gay rights too ;)

Re:Jobs could always... (1)

Tickletaint (1088359) | about 7 years ago | (#18863381)

Maybe you meant that as a joke, but—in the unlikely event you didn't already know—Jobs is indeed a flaming hippie liberal. So's his wife. Hell, so is Cupertino. One more reason I'm glad to give my money to Apple instead of to Michael Dell.

Elsewhere... (0, Offtopic)

djupedal (584558) | about 7 years ago | (#18862685)

"Hello, this is Norddest Airways RapidExit Request Hotline, my name is Danielle-Shawnee-Alisa-Moonshine, where do you wish to fly today?"

"Hi, eh, Moonshine, my name is Steve Jobs and I need a ticket to anywhere overseas, on the next plane out of Dodge - what've ya got?"

"Yes Sir, Mr. Jobs...let's take a look at the latest departures and see what we have - the next flight, which leaves in 42 minutes, is for Guatemala, via Houston...how does that sound?"

"...no good - anything direct?"

"Well, we do have a flight leaving in one hour and fifteen minutes for Abu Dhabi. It is an 18 hour flight with one carry-on and one hand-truck allowed only - how much cash did you intend to take with you?"

"How much cash? Are you kidding? All of it, of course!"

"I see. Well, Mr. Jobs, there is a $75,000.00 fee for anything over 28 kilos, which must be paid at the gate, in..."

"No problem! - Book it!"

Re:Elsewhere... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863139)

Yeah right. Like this will happen.

(Jobs has a Gulfstream V that Apple board gave him. Yay!)

Maybe ... (5, Funny)

PPH (736903) | about 7 years ago | (#18862789)

...Jobs can just claim that the backdating was the result of a really badly screwed up DST patch.

I am sure Steve Jobs broke many laws (1, Insightful)

iamacat (583406) | about 7 years ago | (#18862855)

What do you expect from a guy who parks in handicapped stalls? The only thing is, if he removed from the company, I hope Steve Balmer, Larry Ellison and most other CEOs are required to resign at the same time. In Microsoft's case, its clear that all top executives allowed the company to break antitrust laws in a way that was repeatedly pointed out to them by US government. It's high time to make upper management responsible for any lawbreaking by their firm. In my opinion, this would make running a huge company impossible and this is a good thing. You should personally know the people working for you and take responsibility for who they are and what they do.

Re:I am sure Steve Jobs broke many laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863089)

Wow! By my count, it took a whole 23 posts before "dark and evil" Microsoft got dragged into this topic! That's like some kind of Slashdot record, right?

Yeah we could try that. Then again..... (0)

NDPTAL85 (260093) | about 7 years ago | (#18863489)

you could just grow up and stop believing in ponies. Not being able to run large companies would destroy our economy. Its far more worth it to our society as a whole to allow a few executives to go overboard with their power than it is to totally wreck our national economy and throw millions out of work. The rest of the world isn't going to put a number of workers cap on their companies and they'll eat our lunch.

So no, you should not have to personally know each and every person who works for you. Thats just retarded.

Re:Yeah we could try that. Then again..... (2, Interesting)

senatorpjt (709879) | about 7 years ago | (#18863733)

Not being able to run large companies would destroy our economy, but maybe that would be a good thing, after the economy recovers. Having a bunch of competitors doing the same thing ends up working better than having one huge monopoly, maybe.

Re:Yeah we could try that. Then again..... (2, Informative)

MobyDisk (75490) | about 7 years ago | (#18864811)

Having a bunch of competitors doing the same thing ends up working better than having one huge monopoly, maybe.
For a quick overview, try Ideal firm size [wikipedia.org] . I also recommend reading Economies of Scale and Diseconomies of scale, which are linked from that article.

SEC filed charges today (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18862913)

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission made the following announcement today:

SEC Charges Former Apple General Counsel for Illegal Stock Option Backdating
http://sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-70.htm [sec.gov]

Apple would probably be in deeper trouble... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 years ago | (#18862959)

...if backdating was patented already. Meaning, submarine patents are more destablizing than financial caught-in-cookie-jar.

A disturbance in the force (2, Funny)

bl8n8r (649187) | about 7 years ago | (#18862985)

Mac: "PC, I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced."

PC: "Oh, that was the door to courtroom slamming shut. There are six Mac users out in the hallway singing Jonestown's Classics..... Hey mac, is this Gatorade??"

warning: bad pun ahead (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 years ago | (#18862991)

SEC could someday require Jobs to resign

Would he then change his name to "Steven Pinkslips"?
     

More options than the iPod... (1, Funny)

bugnuts (94678) | about 7 years ago | (#18863111)

Introducing the iFraud (tm)

Apple is currently negotiating the trademark, reportedly still held by Enron.

Shareholders (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 7 years ago | (#18863117)

Remember, this is all for the benefit of the shareholders. They will be so much better off once he is gone.

Re:Shareholders (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18863547)

More for the benefit of the "get Jobs" crowd.

SEC can require resignation? (2, Interesting)

samantha (68231) | about 7 years ago | (#18863265)

Since when? Either they press criminal charges or they do not. But even if they do and found guilty there is no power in the law I am aware of that can force someone to resign their position. IANAL, but if such power is in the hands of SEC it is clearly pernicious.

Re:SEC can require resignation? (1)

gertam (1019200) | about 7 years ago | (#18863477)

The SEC can seek to bar people from being members of the board of a company if they have broken securities laws. Martha Stewart is banned for 5 years from being a director of a public company. Something similar could conceivably happen to Jobs.

Re:SEC can require resignation? (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | about 7 years ago | (#18863499)

No no no - Slashdotters have such a great fucking grip on reality - the last line should read"

"This is serious business. It is quite possible that the SEC could someday make Steve Jobs explode just my making a single phone call with their magical fucking CEO exploder phone!"

And Snakes on a Plane was OSCAR WINNER MATERIAL BABY! PWNED!

Steve, Why'd You Ever Hire This Guy to Start With? (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | about 7 years ago | (#18863385)

He didn't have to admit to any of his own wrongdoing. He was too busy admitting to Steve Job's wrongdoing to help Steve out. Isn't it great when you staff is so helpful?

Anderson's Full Text (3, Insightful)

TechnicolourSquirrel (1092811) | about 7 years ago | (#18863615)

The full text of Fred Anderson's statement: http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/in dex.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070424006168& newsLang=en [businesswire.com]

"Fred Anderson has a long-standing impeccable reputation and is widely regarded as one of the most ethical CFO's in the nation whose extraordinary contributions to Apple's success during his eight-year tenure are unquestioned. He is accurately recognized by many current and former Apple employees and throughout the industry as a man of exceptional ability, achievement and integrity. "With respect to today's announced settlement by the SEC of its complaint against him, Fred is pleased to put this matter behind him. "In the settlement Fred makes no admission or denial of the claims by the SEC. The terms of the settlement permit Fred to continue to act as an officer or director of public companies and do not bar him from practicing before the SEC. The claims against him also do not include fraud under the two antifraud provisions of the securities laws requiring proof of knowing misconduct. "With respect to the Executive Team grant that is the subject of the complaint against him: * Fred was told by Steve Jobs in late January 2001 that Mr. Jobs had the agreement of the Board of Directors for the Executive Team grant on January 2, 2001. At the time Mr. Jobs provided Fred this assurance, Fred cautioned Mr. Jobs that the Executive Team grant would have to be priced based on the date of the actual Board agreement or there could be an accounting charge. He further advised Mr. Jobs that the Board would have to confirm its prior approval in a legally satisfactory method. He was told by Mr. Jobs that the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it. Fred relied on these statements by Mr. Jobs and from them concluded the grant was being properly handled. * Fred understood that, under Apple's stock option plan and accounting rules at the time, a grant date could be moved to a later date than the date of the actual grant decision and that there would be no compensation expense as long as the stock price on the new date was higher than the price on the original date. Apple's 1998 Executive Officer Stock Option Plan provided in Section 16 that 'The date of grant of an Option...shall be, for all purposes, the date on which the Administrator (in this case the Board) makes the determination granting such Option...or such later date as is determined by the Administrator '. Mr. Anderson understood that the date of grant was to be moved forward pursuant to this provision from January 2 to January 17 to avoid any appearance of impropriety that might arise from a grant awarded just prior to the stock price rise that resulted from the 2001 MacWorld exhibition and Mr. Job's keynote speech at the exhibition on January 9. He further understood that the January 17 date was selected by Mr. Jobs and Ms. Nancy Heinen, the former General Counsel, and that the stock price on January 17 was higher than the price on January 2. * Finally, Mr. Anderson understood that the Board of Directors, which consisted of sophisticated corporate executives of national stature, including the former Chief Financial Officer of IBM, verified the January 17 date by signing in early February 2001 a Unanimous Written Consent (UWC) with an effective date of January 17. It now appears the Board may not have given the necessary prior approval to the grants, contrary to what Mr. Anderson understood from Mr. Jobs and from the Board's signing of the UWC with an effective date of January 17. "Mr. Anderson has agreed to pay disgorgement, the difference in the value of the stock between the January 17 date and the date in early February when the UWC was signed by the Board. "With respect to the October 2001 grant to Mr. Jobs that is also the subject of the complaint, Fred had virtually no involvement as he was not a member of the Board and did not have a formal role in compensation matters pertaining to the CEO. Fred had absolutely no knowledge of any alteration of Board documents and this is reflected by the fact that he is not even mentioned in those charges. "Fred Anderson remains proud of his accomplishments as a former CFO and Board member at Apple. He wishes the company and its many talented employees continued success. With this matter resolved, Fred looks forward to continuing his career as a Founder and Managing Director of Elevation Partners."
If Steve Jobs told Fred Anderson that "the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it", why would Anderson have "relied on these statements" instead of doing exactly as Jobs suggested and giving the Board the opportunity to, in fact, verify it? Instead of doing this and evaluating for himself whether requirements were met, he relied on the opinion of a non-expert in the accounting definition of what constitutes legal 'prior approval'? Maybe Jobs just meant that he was assured the grant was a lock. Does anyone really believe that it was ever in question that this grant was going to happen? To a reasonable non-accountant this could very easily seem like the right answer to Anderson's question. This is why you don't rely on the interpretation of a reasonable non-accountant: you look at the paperwork or you ask an actual accountant (or a lawyer) who has looked at the paperwork. Note that Jobs didn't tell him to "rely on those statements". He referred Anderson to the Board. Anderson obviously either didn't follow up on that referral or finds it doesn't suit his purpose to say so in this public statement. Either way, there is a hole in this public statement that you could drive a plateless Mercedes through.

You know what they say... (1)

imamac (1083405) | about 7 years ago | (#18863705)

Misery loves company. Let's point to somebody else so they're not just pointing at me.

It's actually quite simple... (1)

mpaque (655244) | about 7 years ago | (#18864623)

Apple had been operating under the common interpretation of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123:

http://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas123.pdf [fasb.org] Oct 1995, 134 pages

However, Apple and several thousand other companies were surprised to learn that their understanding of FASB 123 might be flawed, and so the Federal Accounting Standards Board issued a clarification in December 2004, the cleverly named Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), more commonly known as FASB 123R.

http://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas123r.pdf [fasb.org] Dec 2004, 286 pages

Now, it will be intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer that there are certain technical differences between these documents, extending beyond mere thickness and into the mystical realm of public accountancy. I won't belabor the obvious by going into details of the audits and revisions that resulted from this event.

so much for that $1 salary (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18864689)

I guess it's easy to get paid $1 when you're swindling the company out of all that money. The guy is a PR genius.

Sure, just like Bill Gates was forced to resign (1)

gig (78408) | about 7 years ago | (#18864777)

In the worst case scenario for Jobs, he did not even do enough to get into the Republican party. Bill Gates will send Jobs a bottle of champagne with a note that reads "join the club."

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...