Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned • Hacker News Board

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#11

Post by DavidSJ » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:11 AM UTC

sho wrote: post #7

"Apple has previously drawn criticism from some shareholders over what they have called limited disclosure of Mr. Jobs's health problems" "once Mr. Jobs resumes work, the company will have to be "very careful" about what it says" This strikes me as almost unbelievably cynical, that Jobs' health could be factored into the price of Apple shares. I understand why, of course, but still, I hate it and I wonder how SJ hims…

How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its value?

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#12

Post by mynameishere » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:12 AM UTC

Reminds me of the fact fame and fortune aren't worth much compared with health. I wouldn't trade places with him [...takes another sip of wine.]

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#13

Post by jsz0 » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:18 AM UTC

They made the right choice in how they handled this. His personal medical issues would have completely overshadowed Apple's recent product announcements and completely derailed the carefully crafted Apple PR train. Instead of talking about Macbooks & iPhones we'd be talking about the details of liver transplants. That would not have been good for Apple or its investors -- some of which will surely be upset over how this was handled but they really need to consider the alternative before getting too worked up over it

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#14

Post by sho » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:34 AM UTC

DavidSJ wrote: post #11

sho wrote: post #7

"Apple has previously drawn criticism from some shareholders over what they have called limited disclosure of Mr. Jobs's health problems" "once Mr. Jobs resumes work, the company will have to be "very careful" about what it says" This strikes me as almost unbelievably cynical, that Jobs' health could be factored into the price of Apple shares. I understand why, of course, but still, I hate it and I wonder how SJ hims…

How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its value?

Because it's basically placing monetary bets on another human being's health. Yeah, I know he's the key person, I know why they do it, I just think it's depressing that our society still hasn't risen above putting a dollar value on life.

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#15

Post by sho » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:36 AM UTC

vaksel wrote: post #10

sho wrote: post #7

"Apple has previously drawn criticism from some shareholders over what they have called limited disclosure of Mr. Jobs's health problems" "once Mr. Jobs resumes work, the company will have to be "very careful" about what it says" This strikes me as almost unbelievably cynical, that Jobs' health could be factored into the price of Apple shares. I understand why, of course, but still, I hate it and I wonder how SJ hims…

He is only 54, plenty of things he can still do

Since he's already had surgery for pancreatic cancer, and now this, I wouldn't be too sure about that.

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#16

Post by il » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:38 AM UTC

mynameishere wrote: post #12

Reminds me of the fact fame and fortune aren't worth much compared with health. I wouldn't trade places with him [...takes another sip of wine.]

Jobs and Apple have changed the world in so many ways. WTF have you done with your life?

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#17

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:47 AM UTC

DavidSJ wrote: post #11

sho wrote: post #7

"Apple has previously drawn criticism from some shareholders over what they have called limited disclosure of Mr. Jobs's health problems" "once Mr. Jobs resumes work, the company will have to be "very careful" about what it says" This strikes me as almost unbelievably cynical, that Jobs' health could be factored into the price of Apple shares. I understand why, of course, but still, I hate it and I wonder how SJ hims…

How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its value?

You wait until someone's aggressively shorting DavidSJ.com.

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#18

Post by gizmo » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:49 AM UTC

sho wrote: post #14

DavidSJ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its value?

Because it's basically placing monetary bets on another human being's health. Yeah, I know he's the key person, I know why they do it, I just think it's depressing that our society still hasn't risen above putting a dollar value on life.

Why should we rise above it? What's wrong with estimating somebody's worth in dollars?

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#19

Post by hko » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 5:49 AM UTC

il wrote: post #16

mynameishere wrote: post #12

Reminds me of the fact fame and fortune aren't worth much compared with health. I wouldn't trade places with him [...takes another sip of wine.]

Jobs and Apple have changed the world in so many ways. WTF have you done with your life?

Relax, he's not attacking Jobs or bragging about himself, just saying he's fortunate to be healthy.

Re: Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned

#20

Post by johnnybgoode » Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 6:17 AM UTC

sho wrote: post #14

DavidSJ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its value?

Because it's basically placing monetary bets on another human being's health. Yeah, I know he's the key person, I know why they do it, I just think it's depressing that our society still hasn't risen above putting a dollar value on life.

Ultimately, it's just a bunch of guesses anyway. It's not a top-down pronouncement of the value of Steve Jobs's life. If you want the theoretical case for doing this, it's supposed to assist in efficient resource allocation, which helps all of society. In other words, if we ever really "rise above" this sort of thing we'll all be poorer.