The SEC Is Getting Closer To Jobs

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."

Comments

Despite it all

[ShooterNeo]

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

[MalleusEBHC]

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

[afidel]

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

[wass]

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.

I'm not convinced either are guilty

[Cadallin]

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.

Re:More Likely than Resignation

[wass]

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 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.

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

SEC can require resignation?

[samantha]

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:Yeah we could try that. Then again.....

[senatorpjt]

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.