Jobs liver transplant: Is it time for Apple to officially name a new leader?

There has been much uproar about the Wall Street Journal report released over the weekend claiming that 54-year-old Apple cofounder Steve Jobs had a liver transplant two months ago in Tennessee. Apple has not issued an official statement, nor is it expected to do so immediately as Jobs was out on medical leave at the time and the company has covered its legal bases by publicly stated that back in January when it vaguely announced its leader was suffering from a "hormone imbalance." Perhaps a statement will come when Jobs returns to his desk; he is slated to do so at the end of the month.

Holders of Apple stock, AAPL, have long criticized the company for not being more upfront about Job’s health issues, issues that date back to the 1990s when he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. AAPL has been negatively impacted by Jobs health rumors and the occasional official statement from Apple.

After the stock climbed on Friday as consumers lined up to buy the latest iPhone, it took a dive today, decreasing by $2.11 to close at $137.37. Part of the decline was forced by today’s overall weak market and part, most likely, was caused by Wall Street fear that Jobs’ health is once again waning.

Why has Apple not shifted its spotlight or at least widened it to more commonly include others? The company is dripping with talent — more like oozing, actually — yet the public face solely remains an obviously ill Jobs. Why not show off your other shining stars, allowing stockholders and consumers to more clearly see an executive transition plan, when the company can succeed without Jobs everyday presence? Note that Apple three days intosold more than a million iPhone 3G S devices, handsets priced at $99, $199, and $299 — not pocket change given the current recession’s squeeze on consumer spending.

Perhaps if I owned AAPL* my view would be different. Perhaps I’d be shouting from rooftops that every detail of Jobs’ health is a matter of public disclosure, as it evidently impacts AAPL stock price. Perhaps even if I was a CEO at one of the many chip makers that do business with Apple and that have seen how quickly business can change when Apple slips or takes its business away (recall PortalPlayer’s 2006 loss of its Apple contract and later acquisition by Nvidia), I’d be clamoring for every bit of info on liver transplants I could get my hands on. (By the way, the American Liver Foundation reports that in 2005 there were about 6,500 liver transplants performed in the United States and estimates the five-year survival rate for a liver transplant is around 75%.)

We all know Apple slumped once before when Jobs stepped away. But that was before the company broke through to mainstream consumers with the iPod. Tim Cook, Apple’s COO and the man left in charge while Jobs has been out these last six months, has done a nice job maintaining the company in its CEO’s absence. I, like my colleague Brian Dipert, wish Jobs every blessing there is for a speedy return to good health and can’t begin to express the value this man has brought to the electronics industry within our blog tool’s posting limits. Still, I have to wonder if it is time for him to hand the reins over to someone else at Apple, or at least to begin to express such a transition plan.

Should Jobs step out of the spotlight? Could Cook, with his engineering degree and business background, continue the company’s growth and innovative devices? Would such a move be good for Apple and its product lines? Voice your opinions below.

Update, June 24, 5pm: Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute in Memphis confirmed that it had preformed a liver transplant on Steve Jobs. The institute said Jobs received the transplant because he was the "sickest patient on the waiting list at the time a donor organ became available." On June 23, the institute reported Jobs is recovering well and has an excellent prognosis. As of this update, Apple has not issued an official statement.

*Editor’s note: It is considered unethical for journalists to own stock in the companies they report on. For this reason, the author owns no AAPL stock or stock in companies related to or that do business with Apple.