What is this incessant need to equate a company’s positive performance solely with the machinations of the CEO? And if this was even a mildly valid way to analyze things, how is it that CEO’s wholly evade the negative events a la Nardelli/Welch? That so many equate Apples stock performance as if Steve Jobs were the only decision maker in the company, is simply ridiculous!
Factually Mr. Jobs does not design the products which so many find worthy of their high prices. And as the Apple design ethos is one of the major driving factors towards Apple products moving out the door, more properly speaking it is Mr. Ive who is driving product desire at Apple. As Apples head of design Mr. Ives has a highly developed sense not only of leading design cues, he is able to translate his visions into capable working products whose very design imbues the user with industrial chic.
Apple is a company to state the obvious, comprised of many individuals, all of whom contribute in ways big and small to creating the hardware and software; in this, thousands of decisions which all lead to a successful company. To equate all of these decisions with a companies titular head exclusively is a spurious method. Factually Mr. Jobs could leave tomorrow and the company would continue to function at least as well, and perhaps even better given Mr. Jobs known propensity for histrionics and ill temper.
Now, how is it that Mr. Jobs evaded SEC action on those options?