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 : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LLCF who wrote (30616)10/24/2000 10:04:23 AM
From: Perspective  Read Replies (2) of 436258
 
<I still don't see why not... if you dilute by 10% to buy some company, your earnings have to be 10% higher to keep the same EPS. If not, EPS starts to plummet because of all those shares floating around. This recipe has caused many a hot stock to get absolutely CREAMED... "growth through aquisition" has not had a great record in many cases.>

Like I said before, if I have 10M shares outstanding, and I issue 1M more, raising $50M, I could simply set fire to the money. Is the dilution of the remaining income sufficient penalty for my stupid action? Clearly not. Dilution alone is not an adequate accounting of the management error. The income statement should be impacted as well. Income statements are a way of charting changes in shareholder equity over time. Positive income means an individual share is gaining ground, and negative means losing ground.

However, I agree with Don now. In stock for stock transactions, the correct impact on the individual shareholders depends upon the relative valuations of the companies. If you are the most overvalued company on the planet, it is to your shareholders' advantage to go acquire every asset you possibly can with your funny money. Despite an increasing float, it is actually negative dilution, which if anything would result in the need to post an income stream to the earnings statement.

Determining whether dilution or accretion is taking place is therefore virtually impossible, since the relative valuations are clearly a matter of opinion.

The same is *NOT* true of options. There is a minimum economic value of an option the day it is issued. It is the cost of a loan to carry the underlying shares. While the options have an inherent put that is virtually impossible to value, this interest expense at a minimum should be expensed.

BC
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