Slimy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I don't know anything about what's been going but as for why people are assuming Jobs is guilty would probably have to do with the fact that it isn't the first time he has been accused of illegal activity regarding stocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I don't know anything about what's been going but as for why people are assuming Jobs is guilty would probably have to do with the fact that it isn't the first time he has been accused of illegal activity regarding stocks. Accused by anyone that can do anything about it, or accused by us? Big difference. No one has accused him of any illegal activity outside of the media and us normal people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 Accused by anyone that can do anything about it, or accused by us? Big difference. No one has accused him of any illegal activity outside of the media and us normal people. That is true. As it stands right, Apple is under investigation for the options backdating, not Jobs. Now SEC has request documents pertaining to Jobs' stocks, but thus far nothing has been publicly announced regarding the information requested. Jobs has said, however, that he did benefit from the options backdating. This does not mean he has done any wrong doing, however. All this means is that someone inside Apple changed the date of when Jobs' stocks were originally purchased to an earlier date that would benefit Jobs. If Jobs did not know about it, and he and/or Apple can prove it, then he is in the clear. What makes it sound like he is guilty, and the reason the media has painted him this way now, is that he is now involved in a possible stock options scandal with a completely different company, Pixar. It would be believable that he was innocent if it was just Apple and I would defend him until proven guilty, which by the way he is still innocent, but with a second company and the same person at the head of both scandals, it does sound fishy. IMO anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted February 13, 2007 Veteran Share Posted February 13, 2007 I honestly could care less which way it goes. If he did have something to do with any illegal activity, he should pay the price...jail time, fine, whatever. Stick it to him for all I care. However I'm not going to jump up and down like a child and say something stupid like 'he's guilty' or 'he deserves it' without knowing anything but a small bit of the whole story. Talk about buffoonery. The above post by Hurmoth suffices as a response to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_Guy Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 The real question though: will he come back after getting out of jail? Like I've said before, maybe he could be PR. He does speak well, no one here can deny that. He does flame too much, that's the issue most people have with him. Martha Stewart came back. I disagree with you on him being a good PR person. His presentations stink of immaturity. Come on guys let's start these competitor's ads on fire!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted February 13, 2007 Author Share Posted February 13, 2007 Martha Stewart came back. Martha Stewart went to trial and was convicted in March 2004 on four counts of lying to investigators and obstruction of justice. Completely different situation here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamNeeds Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I'm sure its being blown out of proportion as most so called scandal usually is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 I'm sure its being blown out of proportion as most so called scandal usually is! So you think making millions of dollars on backdating stock options without notifying SEC and the stockholders isn't that bad of thing? If Steve knew about he needs to be prosecuted just liked anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesseinsf Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Send that brain washer "Jobs" to jail and call his cell iCell...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 If true, this doesn't surprise me one bit. I've never had a favorable opinion of Jobs and after reading iWoz, that opinion was only reinforced. I guess Woz is more forgiving than I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts