Given the broad scale of Apple Computer's independent probe into its stock options irregularities, any subsequent investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission is likely to turn up consistent results, one Wall Street analyst says.
The analyst had previously stated his belief that there was a less than 5 percent likelihood Apple chief executive Steve Jobs was involved in the falsification of options documents.
"We view [Apple's findings] as a positive given investor's concerns that this issue could lead to the removal of Steve Jobs," he wrote in a research note.
Munster, at the same time, implied that some investors may choose to act with caution ahead of any formal comments from the SEC on the matter. However, he added, "given the scope of Apple's exhaustive internal investigation, we believe that any SEC findings would be consistent with Apple's findings."
In its delayed 10K filing on Friday, Apple said its independent counsel and forensic accountants reviewed stock option grants made on 259 dates, in which they spent over 26,500 person-hours searching more than one million physical and electronic documents and interviewing more than 40 current and former directors, officers, employees, and advisors.
In all, Apple's investigation turned up irregularities regarding 6,428 grants on 42 dates. After forfeitures, it recorded a non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $84 million (after tax) to reflect the required restatement changes.
Munster called the financial impact of the restatement "immaterial," as it carries a mere 2 percent impact to the company's net income over the last nine years.
17 Comments
Your title can be taken misleadingly. It implies that the SEC's findings ARE, in fact, echoing Apple's findings. Since no one has actually seen the SEC's findings, there is no proof of echoing. Gene M. predicts they will be similar. Totally different from "see"ing.
Sure you can say, "I see them coming out ahead on this deal" but that can be interpreted two ways.
1) you predict them coming out ahead on the deal.
2) you actually see them coming out ahead on the deal.
In the case of your title, you mean #1, but I first read it as #2. I'm probably not the only one.
Moral? Fix the title.
-Clive
Lots of media sources use a similar headline style. No need to fix it, as I certainly did not misunderstand it.
I hope that the SEC does echo Apple's findings so that we can have a great 2007 and I can spend lots of money!
I disagree,
When i saw the title, I concluded it meant that someone thought they would have the same outcomes, not that they actually have.
If i was to say I see apple producing an iPhone it is meaning that i predict they will produce one.
Maybe it is just used differently your side of the pond.
stu
"Person-Hours"... he he
"Person-Hours"... he he
I believe you meant to say "s/he s/he."