Steve Jobs is sick.
After markets closed Wednesday, Apple released a statement indicating its CEO, Jobs, will relinquish his top post due to health concerns—and so he can stop distracting his employees.
"In order to take myself out of the limelight and focus on my health, and to allow everyone at Apple to focus on delivering extraordinary products, I have decided to take a medical leave of absence until the end of June," he wrote to employees.
The company’s stock price plunged Wednesday in after-hours trading.
This comes just one week after he issued a statement insisting he was a little under the weather due to a “hormone imbalance,” but otherwise just fine.
But is his health—the health of the man who invented the iMac, iPod and iPhone—a public matter?
Here’s a little background.
In 2004, doctors treated Jobs for a less lethal form of pancreatic cancer. Although even after treatment of this form of cancer, patients live an average of five years, according to a feature story in the October issue of Esquire magazine.
That story, which is about Jobs, talked of his recent, and notable, weight loss—weight loss that sparked rumor about his ill health back in June.
So who thinks Jobs health is everyone’s business? Lots of people, particularly Apple shareholders. They’re not heartless; it’s just that his health affects Apple’s stock price.
For instance, when a blogger advanced the rumor—based on an anonymous source—that Jobs was near death in December, Apple shares sank.
“There is a big Jobs premium in the stock price,” John A. Byrne, editor-in-chief of BusinessWeek.com, wrote on Twitter on Jan. 5. “At least 25% or more. His health is news.”
Problem is Jobs, and his PR machine, think his health should be kept private. To meet this goal, they have been—to put it kindly—less than straight-forward. For example, back in June, Apple’s PR pros blamed their boss’s notable weight loss on a “common bug,” The New York Times said.
That claim was false, according to Times reporter Joe Nocera. “By claiming Mr. Jobs had a bug, Apple wasn’t just going dark on its shareholders,” he said. “It was deceiving them.”
And now this: news that Jobs will take a medical leave of absence one week after he said he was basically OK and stressed to anyone who cared to listen, “I’ve said more than I wanted to say, and all that I am going to say, about this.”
Apple shareholders deserve to know more—and Jobs should let his PR people tell them.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Hello!
Reassuring to see that BP oil spill is number one. I will take this to mean, being the eternal optimist that I a... 
RSS
Comments (7)
According to the Wall Street Journal's Law Blog, the SEC is investigating this. The Journal quoted some lawyers saying that if Apple's PR people and management "knew at that time that statement [about a hormone imbalance] was not correct that could be a problem for them”....and another former federal prosecutor, said “From what I can see based on what I’m reading it could be a big problem. He [Mr. Jobs] is Apple.”
Posted by Tim | January 23, 2009 8:33 AM
Posted on January 23, 2009 08:33
I have invested in Apple heavily over the past half-decade to the tune of three ipods, an ipod shuffle, an imac, and about three days worth of music on itunes.
I see much corollary between Apple's current perfect storm and the career arch of Guns 'N Roses.
Lou's comment could easily describe Geffen Record's positioning of Axl Rose as the sole creative force behind Guns 'N Roses in the late 1980's.
http://hotmessdigest.blogspot.com/2009/01/apples-rockstar-moment.html
Posted by Sue Bylevyn | January 16, 2009 6:07 PM
Posted on January 16, 2009 18:07
I am a long-time Apple shareholder and an investor relations person. Steve Jobs' health information is "material" in the legal sense. As the Business Week reproter said, a good portion of the value of the stock has Steve Jobs' presence at Apple built into it. There has been no public succession plan. PR departments that can be proven to try to conceal or suppress material information can open themselves up to some serious SEC questioning. Two things happened here that make this even more possible: 1) Steve Jobs' health was an issue last June and it was never clarified to the market or the public; 2) When the company announced Jobs' leave of absence, the stock price tanked. When one event precipitates a dramatic drop in value, Nasdaq will immediately start an informal review of the matter to determine if an investigation is warranted and if the SEC needs to be involved. I am sure that is not an issue here, because the way Jobs addressed the issue sounds like the only reason he said what he did say was on the advice of legal counsel, not PR counsel.
Posted by Tim | January 16, 2009 9:48 AM
Posted on January 16, 2009 09:48
By positioning Jobs as the creative force behind Apple's products, the company has made his health a public concern. I wish Mr. Jobs well. Perhaps during his leave of absence Apple can showcase other "faces" and make it clear that its current and future products are the result of Apple's corporate vision and genius, not only Steve Jobs' latest idea.
Posted by Lou Malnassy | January 15, 2009 11:28 AM
Posted on January 15, 2009 11:28
Time will tell whether this is deadly to Apple. I've long been a believer in openness. Had Jobs been forthright from the beginning, there would have been damage, but manageable damage. They cold have made a smooth public transition to new leadership with Jobs slowly backing out of the picture. Saying his health problem is no big deal and then springing the bad news is almost certain to have a terrible effect on company stock, worker morale and public confidence in Apple.
Posted by Drew | January 15, 2009 11:26 AM
Posted on January 15, 2009 11:26
I am a long time Apple user and fan. But I like them because of their products, not their public relations. I say that because they have long been too secretive. Sometimes, like when introducing new products, that's acceptable. But on too many other matters, they decline comment. The company might argue, "Yeah, but look at how successful we are." I would say "But think about how much more successful you might be with a more open PR approach." When you don't talk, rumors fill the void. Sometimes the rumors become truth as the company declines to respond. Sometimes, rumors that ultimately don't come true lead to disappointment such as the rumors leading up to MacWorld of a new Mac Mini - which did not happen. As this Ragan site so often points out, more communication is usually better. It's hard to change a culture but perhaps it is time for Apple to face up to the fact it's not a little niche company anymore. By the way, I, too, hope Jobs is okay but the way this story keeps getting worse...
Posted by Tripp Frohlichstein | January 15, 2009 9:56 AM
Posted on January 15, 2009 09:56
I hope Mr Steve Jobs will be back soon, because Apple needs him a lot !
Posted by bar paris | January 15, 2009 9:27 AM
Posted on January 15, 2009 09:27