“Yesterday’s mistake by the Associated Press about Steve Jobs and Apple’s conference call, and whether he was there, is commonly there, not commonly there, whether it was an indication of health issues, or no health issues, just struck me as weird,” Jim Goldman writes for CNBC.
“The background: When Apple began its conference call, Steve Jobs was absent. Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer handled the duties. And in a normal circumstance, that scenario would get little attention. But following the New York Post’s coverage yesterday morning about certain hedge fund managers ‘worried’ about Steve Jobs’ health, rehashing a bunch of details that were well over a month old, it brought the whole issue back into the discourse. And that’s probably what was on the mind of the Associated Press reporter covering the conference call, wondering why Jobs wasn’t present,” Goldman writes.
MacDailyNews Take: You can politely call what the Post did yesterday “coverage,” Jim; we’re sticking with “bullshit.”
Goldman continues, “She wrote in an early filing: ‘Steve Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, did not join the conference call with investors as he commonly does, prompting an analyst to inquire about his health. Jobs survived pancreatic cancer.'”
“Apple shares were already suffering enormous pressure heading into the call because of the company’s weaker than expected fourth quarter guidance,” Goldman writes. “But when this story, with those sentences, hit the wires, Apple’s plunge accelerated into a free-fall. Was Jobs ill? Did his absence from the call indicate that he wasn’t physically up to it? Were all those concerns a month ago, that finally began to dissipate, actually well-founded? It seemed investors were answering yes, yes, and yes, and drove Apple shares down dramatically. The message boards lit up like a Christmas tree with brutal speculation about what this all meant.”
“Investors, however, should have answered ‘no,’ ‘no,’ and ‘no.,'” Goldman explains. “You see, Jobs is never on the company’s earnings call. Never. Ever. And anyone covering this company knows it. And anyone investing in the company should know it. And that’s why that sentence in the AP story is so troubling, and so factually off base.”
More in the full article – recommended – here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “JES42” for the heads up.]