AAPL falls $6.27 during rough trading day

Never forget that it was Woz who made the initial Apple I and II along with the software. Jobs was a frontman.

Over time, they recruited enough talent that, when Woz left Apple, Apple was OK without him.

After Jobs was kicked from the "band", the "band" lost fans and on its way to breaking up. Then Jobs came back as the frontman with a bunch of new stuff he worked on while on hiatus.

Today's Apple is now based on Jobs's stuff, like Woz before. It's really hard to say what will happen if Jobs leaves. Would public reation follow in the tradition of Woz? (possibly -- I'm sure Apple is hoping). Or would the "band" break up?

The Apple strategy is correct, it is hard to believe why it took so long to realize that APPLE is APPLE and not Steve = APPLE
This is branding issue and it already says a lot when he is not attending the stocks goes down, it will take some time for users to go after the APPLE branding and not Steve.

"AAPL falls $6.27 _during rough trading day_"

((91-89.16)/91)*100%=2.02%

I think it's so unique the way the CEO of Apple (Jobs) is also the frontman. When the Wii was introduced, I don't remember any one man in particular who introduced it, yet it is still the most sought after game system to date (unless you want to call the iPt a gaming system). Apple's cult-like following and such close relation to the CEO has had it's many ups and downs. Let's suppose the chief engineer for the next... i dunno gameboy or XBOX were to be diagnosed with cancer, would you hear about it? would you care, honestly? not entirely related but my point i want to convey is that Apple is a one of a kind company, and they always impress, playing by the "rules" that work for other companies don't apply to Apple because they aren't other companies. they know what theyre doing. I'm betting that secrecy for the new products is the sole reason for the Macworld news, and clearly leaking has become too prominent.

If anyone thinks that Apple does not have a succession plan in place, they are nuts. All of the attention paid to detail in their products, and some still think that they will simply let the company go to hell without thinking through every little facet of transferring the running of Apple?

Just because it hasn't been made clear to us onlookers (and what in Apple is ever clear to us onlookers?) doesn't mean a plan isn't in place ready to go. And this is all assuming that he is actually stepping down for whatever reason.

Okay, here comes my analysis of this...

First off, I was upset that Steve wasn't going to be there in January. And so was a ton of other people. But, looking back at it, it'll help Apple's stock in the long run. You see, Apple's stock (and the company itself) is based off of hype. Last year's MacWorld had so much hype going into it that when Apple didn't deliver what analysts want, the stock tanked.

So, with Apple not going to MacWorld, this will probably lead to a steady stock before, during, and after it. But TWO things should be on Apple's focus right now... Steve Jobs' health and his succession plan. Those two things over the next couple of months will have more of an effect on the stock then products they announce.

Overreacting much?