Bloomberg: Apple’s Jobs should give back the $85 million

“Apple Computer Inc.’s Steve Jobs should give it up,” Graef Crystal writes for Bloomberg. “What am I talking about?”

Crystal writes, “Some $85 million or so that the chief executive officer collected because of a sleight-of-hand the maker of the iPod music player and Macintosh computers engaged in when it awarded Jobs some mammoth stock option grants. That’s money that should go back to the shareholders.”

“Apple’s well-oiled public relations machine has said that because of ‘irregularities’ in the grants, the options were canceled ‘and resulted in no financial gain to the CEO,” Crystal writes.

Crystal writes, “Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Full article here.

Related articles:
Apple Computer Directors may have had conflicts of interest in options investigation – October 11, 2006
Apple’s options disclosures leave plenty of unanswered questions – October 09, 2006
Apple shareholders await earnings restatements; Steve Jobs still not in the clear – October 06, 2006
Former CFO Anderson helped turn Apple Computer around – October 05, 2006
Wall Street unshaken by results of Apple stock options investigation – October 05, 2006
Is Apple rotten at the core? – October 05, 2006
Analyst: Anderson, Heinen may be former Apple executives responsible for irregular options grants – October 05, 2006
Analyst: Apple restatement due to options irregularities not expected to be significant – October 04, 2006
Apple’s special committee reports findings of stock option investigation – October 04, 2006
Google CEO declines Apple automatic stock option grant; plans to buy 10,000 AAPL shares instead – September 01, 2006
Google CEO Dr. Eric Schmidt joins Apple’s Board of Directors – August 29, 2006
Shareholders allege Apple execs reaped ‘millions’ in unlawful profits – August 23, 2006
How options-backdating irregularities can affect your Apple Computer stock – August 23, 2006
Apple’s options imbroglio: Mac-maker granted options at or near key events in company’s history – August 18, 2006
Apple added to Nasdaq’s list of ‘delinquent companies’ – August 18, 2006
Apple unlikely to be delisted by NASDAQ – August 16, 2006
Apple CEO Steve Jobs drawn into stock options scandal – August 15, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – August 11, 2006
As expected, Apple delays quarterly results due to stock-options grants review – August 11, 2006
Some stock options grant decisions were made by Apple board, and potentially, CEO Steve Jobs – August 10, 2006
Disney: no material impact from Pixar options – August 09, 2006
Pixar options draw scrutiny – August 08, 2006
Apple stock options scandal? What scandal? – August 07, 2006
Class action lawsuit over stock options filed against Apple Computer, Inc. – August 04, 2006
Wall Street forgiving of Apple’s stock option irregularities; CEO Jobs unlikely to be terminated – August 04, 2006
Apple’s stock option irregularities escalate into a scandal as world awaits Steve Jobs’ WWDC keynote – August 04, 2006
Apple warns of profit restatement dating back to 2002 – August 04, 2006
Apple loses 3.5% to $67.15 in premarket trading – August 04, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – August 03, 2006
Shareholder’s options suit against Apple alleges ‘striking pattern that could not have been chance’ – July 11, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – July 05, 2006
UBS: stock options probe unlikely to hurt Apple – June 30, 2006
Apple joins growing list of companies entangled in stock option ‘irregularities’ – June 29, 2006
Apple to investigate stock option grant ‘irregularities’ made between 1997 and 2001 – June 29, 2006
Fred D. Anderson joins Apple Board – June 08, 2004
Apple CFO Anderson to retire on June 1, 2004; will join Apple’s Board of Directors – February 05, 2004


  1. Poppycock,
    Well, it appears you missed the point of the internal audit conducted by Apple in addition to your misunderstanding of the main issue here.

    The practice of backdating options is legal. Everyone knows that and no one is debating that point. Nor is anyone making the argument that Jobs is being over compensated for his contribution to Apple’s success. Rather, the issue is that the procedure regarding his compensation was done secretly, which is not legal. Regardless of how much he is worth to the company, all compensation should be done in a manner that is completely legitimate. This is not an accusation made against Jobs himself. However, it would be a good gesture on Jobs’ part to distance himself completely from any association with any type of wrongdoing. Apple can always correct his compensation by paying him more later.

  2. All I can say is I wish I could pick the lowest price of Apple stock in a 90 day period…

    Ends does not justify the means. So Zeke, if Apple hadn’t performed so admirabley the last several years, would the tune change? Should it change? I personally think not. There’s nothing wrong with rewarding SJ handsomely. It should just be done very transparently. Moving around strike dates to eek the last dollar out isn’t. Boy, I wish I could do that…

  3. We know that backdating options is legal so long as it is not hidden.

    ALL of the info Crystal gave was PUBLIC info. He merely summarized points to support his argument.

    So, how can Crystal conclude any wrongdoing if all of his information was public? Yes, Apple moved options around to put together a more fair compensation package for SJ. But they did it with full disclosure. As a shareholder, I knew about it. That’s what matters.

    Finally, we need to put this whole thing behind us. And i’m gonna sue the next people who start a shareholder lawsuit on this issue. The law is about fairness to all shareholders, how is it fair to allow a small group who likely has divested the stock to crash the stock price for their own financial gain?

  4. “how is it fair to allow a small group who likely has divested the stock to crash the stock price for their own financial gain?”

    News flash: Apple to allow investors to pick lowest stock price in the 12 months since they purchased their stock and get cash rebate from Apple for the difference between that and what they paid.

  5. Should ALL the shareholders give their profits back to Apple? sounds good to me… she must not be a Apple share holder, or any share holder for that matter, it sure sounds like she has no clue about the stock market.

  6. “Should ALL the shareholders give their profits back to Apple? “

    clueless? tt that’s you.

    Worst case he should at least give back the ill gotten gains(Although only having to give back what you stole with no other sanctions has never been a very strong deterrent for thieves in the past).

    “Put that one to the shareholders and I think I hear a roar of “thank you” and certainly no cries of “you robbed us”.”

    For a while that was the roar from the Enron shareholders until they realized they’d been had. Then the roar changed.

    Dishonesty is dishonesty. Wait until times get tough again at Apple, see how people react. Unless you’re OK with stealing provided you get your cut too, Jobs should go.

  7. “The practice of backdating options is legal. Everyone knows that and no one is debating that point.”

    That makes as much as saying burying people is OK. But it’s not OK unless they’re dead.

    It’s only legal if you do it properly, they didn’t, so it’s illegal.

    Then the tainted options were traded for stock. Sorry again, If you trade in a stolen car for another one, sure the new car isn’t “stolen” (and that’s Apples spin on things) but what you did sure isn’t right.

  8. And let me make another point.

    If you intend to account for them properly, there’s no difference between backdating options and issuing them today at a different lower strike price.

    The only purpose of backdating options is to pretend that you paid out less money in compensation than you did.

    So while “backdating options, properly accounted for” may not be illegal, there’s really no reason to ever backdate the options if you intend to recognise the compensation properly.

    That in itself is enough to suggest that anybody who is backdating options is up to no good.

  9. And back to the stealing the car analogy. You’ve commited the crime AT THE TIME THAT YOU STEAL CAR regardless of whether you later sell it for profit, push it off a cliff, sink it in a lake, abandon it at the side of the road, give it to a friend, or return it to the rightful owner.

    So what Steve may or may not have done to launder the suspect options has no relevance, nor would returning the money now have any.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.