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.
Pastimes : The Justa & Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Investor2 who wrote (10081)11/30/1999 9:46:00 AM
From: Boca_PETE  Read Replies (1) of 15132
 
I2: re: <IBM Reporting of One-Time Gains>

Having read the WSJ Nov 24 article, I would add the following to my Novemeber 24 comments posted here:

1.) SEC Senior Fellow, Paul Kepple is quoted in the WSJ article asserting that SEC regs require reporting of One-Time Gains on the sale of operating assets as "NON-OPERATING INCOME" (not as part of "OPERATING INCOME"). I believe he is incorrect and would challenge his to show us the specific reg he refers to. My sources say that it was the SEC that insisted on classifying such one-time gains/losses on the sale of assets as "OPERATING INCOME" some years back. What is a "Senior Fellow" anyone ? Could be an old chap hanging around the water fountain. A more credible source would have been the current SEC Chief Accountant.

2.) I'd agree that IBM's netting of material asset write-offs and gains on sales of assets in SG&A EXPENSE is misleading and is poor financial reporting, despite fine print disclosures of impacts. It would have been more appropriate to show material write-offs as a separate line item under "OPERATING EXPENSES" and to show the one-times gains on asset sales either as part of "OTHER INCOME - OPERATING" or as a separate line item under "OPERATING INCOME" (Afterall, GAINS ARE INCOME aren't they?). However, IMHO, I believe that IBM did follow whatever foggy rules are out there - they just don't seem motivated to serve their customers in this case - the analyst community.

Maybe as a result of the controversy, more specific rules will be forthcoming on the reporting of "Special One-times Items".

P


Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News