SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 37.51-0.8%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: steve harris who wrote (174516)5/14/2003 7:14:23 AM
From: Amy J  Read Replies (2) of 186894
 
Hi Steve, "Bryant received 1332852 options in 2002. Not much else to say."

Your statement has no meaning unless it has the grant price, start date, total in-the-money.

When I scrutinized the proxy (a few months ago), the impression I gained was (off the top of my head):

- Bryant was underpaid (I seem to recall that nearly all of his options were underwater. So, 1.3M is normal for cfo, given his performance, revenue size, etc.)
- Barrett didn't seem to sell much in the 80's or 90's. Did a remarkable job at holding on to most of his holdings. Impressive loyalty. He eventually sold quite a bunch ($66M, off top of my head) in 2000. For someone that's about to retire in a few years, it didn't look abnormal. He held his stock for many years and when he sells he tends to sell in the same month (Jan), which gives the impression he's a very classy person in how he handles his stock - I don't have any issue with his prior year options. But do find the 350k last month a tad difficult to understand because it seems incongruent to the past one year performance. (The drops during the other years were bubble inflating and Barrett did a great job navigating around all the landmines, so not his fault at all, but I wouldn't call last year's drop only a bubble deflating, but more of an issue of no profits shored up. But I do think they've got things under control now. They really should turn on the lights back on again - unhealthy for people to work in the dark and the economy is turning around (Q4 SARS depending.)
- Paul O - Sells off a bit here and there, not sure why, but seems to be a bit noticable. Would prefer if he let the # of his shares build up. But I assume he can't because they expire? When I looked at his total and compared it to others, it had the appearances others were holding.
- Forgot his name - but there's one exec who never sells. I'll look up his name on Yahoo sometime. I hope he's good.
- Sean Maloney - Held thru the bad 2001 & 2002 (I think?), but he may want to talk to Barrett about selling stock during the same month rather than July (of 2000).
- Forgot his name#2 - there's one exec who dumps everything he has every year. He seems to be the only one too - sort of stands out. But I think he held onto some stock for the first time this year.
- Grove held on for many years and sold some during the boom I seem to recall from Yahoo reports. I liked how he and Barrett held onto their stock during this recent past Jan - gave confidence. (Ironically, others that sold this year when the stock was in the tankster took more flack, which may not have been fair to them given they sold at a bad price.)
- Those are the only ones I remember off the top of my head. Info may not be correct, but those are my impressions (right or wrong) based upon Yahoo reports.

I think the way Intel is handling their options is stellar. If they were to make some changes, I'd suggest: a) be careful how grants are handled at a 3 year downturn, b) refreshes are okay (esp when the Valley starts getting filled with talk about Intel people wanting to refresh their options outside, so Intel had to fix that by doing a refresh) but last month's grant amount didn't seem okay to me because it had the appearances of rewarding more for a stock downturn during a time when Intel resumes didn't seem to be flooding the Valley (though, there's always demand for the good people, just don't think demands always have to be met.)

Regards,
Amy J
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext