Apple to hold its annual meeting in absence of its iconic CEO

Feb 23, 2009 08:40 GMT  ·  By
Steve Jobs delivering one of his famous keynote addresses, appearing thinner than ever before
   Steve Jobs delivering one of his famous keynote addresses, appearing thinner than ever before

Since he reclaimed leadership at Apple back in 1997, Apple's CEO, Steve Jobs, hasn't missed any of the company's annual meetings. This year, however, Apple will hold its annual meeting without Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs, Bloomberg reports.

The meeting to be held on February 25 (a day after Jobs' 54th birthday) will give shareholders the chance to interrogate Apple's board of directors regarding their silence on Jobs' condition since the CEO announced taking a medical leave last month. Also worth noting, the same source points out, is that this year's meeting is being held earlier than in previous years (March, April or even May).

Apple's CEO issued a statement last month, revealing he was seeking a relatively simple treatment for his weight loss. Days later, Steve Jobs revealed that his doctors told him his health problems were actually “more complex,” therefore needed to take a medical leave.  Following these announcements, members of the media began speculating that Apple's CEO was in need of a liver transplant. It is still not known whether or not Jobs has had the operation.

“'The company has a responsibility to let public shareholders know that the organizational structure will be sound if Steve Jobs has to leave for any reason', said Apple investor Ryan Jacob, head of the Jacob Internet Fund. Apple is the fund’s third-largest holding, accounting for 5.9 percent of its investments as of Dec. 31. The amount of disclosure about what’s going on has been 'poor at best', he said,” according to the Bloomberg report.

Not surprisingly, the Securities and Exchange Commission immediately started an investigation into the “health” disclosures last month to determine whether investors were misled. The report also notes that, despite all this, “the SEC’s review doesn’t mean investigators have seen evidence of wrongdoing.”