I've gone down this road before, and I'm growing tired from it. Unlike so many of you, however, I don't have a financial horse in this race since my company prevents me from owning any shares in any individual company.

chakote Steve Jobs

So my fatigue from the rumor mill must pale in comparison to those of you long on Apple and short on trust right now.

Of course, I'm referring to the now nearly daily rumors of whether Apple co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs is suffering from a relapse of his pancreatic cancer. Or some other undisclosed health malady. Today's rumor du jour came courtesy of an unsourced blog story that purported to show that the real reason why Jobs backed out of Macworld next week is because of his seriously declining health. It's something I addressed in a blog earlier today and I hope I lent some additional perspective on the topic from sources within the company whom I trust.

That aside, the second wave of stories has now begun. How Apple

AAPL loading...

Quote  |  Chart  |  News  |  Profile

[AAPL  Loading...      ()   ] continues to bungle this story. How the company should come clean. How Apple is shirking its fiduciary responsibility by not sharing more details of Jobs' health. How it's not the rumor-mongers and shorts who are responsible for their own rumors (hogwash!), but Apple itself for not being more aggressive in dousing them.

I spent some time on this very topic back in June when this all began, following his keynote at Apple's Developers' Conference, and my interview with Jobs at the time. I was squeamish about sharing my impressions and suppositions about his health after he appeared so noticeably thin.

But I am not squeamish about sharing my thoughts on fiduciary responsibility. Apple back then said Jobs had been suffering from a "common bug" and was being treated successfully with anti-biotics. We learned later from Jobs himself, in a vitriolic exchange with the New York Times' Joe Nocera, that his health issues, while under control, were far more serious than merely a common bug.

From a PR standpoint, it was bad. Apple, it seemed, had been caught in a lie unmasked by the man himself.

But to view it that way is missing the point as it relates to Apple's responsibility to its investors. One man's bug is another man's terminal disease. Some execs can stomach a a bad, lingering flu and head to work every day. Others might be incapacitated for a time, delirious, forcing a company to announce the illness.

Had Jobs been diagnosed with, or suffered from, something that diminished his capacity or precluded him from performing his duties as CEO, the company would be legally -- and ethically -- bound to disclose it. Common bug, something more serious; it didn't matter in June because he was still able to perform. And it matters as little today. He can perform. Until he says, or the company says, he can't.

Look, Apple's decision to characterize Jobs illness in June as something it wasn't was a poor one. Illegal? No. Bad judgment? Yes.

Today's "news" should remind us that this all boils down to a pretty simple concept. Media and bloggers want to cloud your thoughts and opinions with big words, and rumors, and innuendo, and indignancy. Don't get caught in that trap. Either Jobs can perform, or he can't. Apple knows it. And it knows the law. Which means we can surmise that if Apple has nothing to announce about Jobs' health -- and in the absence of hard medical facts to the contrary, Jobs' is healthy enough to do his job. That's all that matters. And calls for Apple to do more are completely acceptable and understandable, but neither the company nor Jobs himself should feel compelled to share anything further.

It's a classic case of "no news is good news." Stop the rumors. And stop believing them. Until Apple says something different, or I get my hands on something tangible and trustworthy, I'm taking the company at its word. All the rest is noise and manipulation. And since the SEC doesn't feel the need to investigate any of this -- which is too bad; and since Apple is doing exactly what it should, Apple shareholders are wise to consider this ongoing madness as a risk factor in this stock. At some point, Apple's massively strong fundamentals will eclipse this garbage. I just don't know when that will be.

So unfortunate. And yet so true.

Questions?  Comments? 

Tools:

PrintEmail

Next Post

Previous PostBack to Main Page