Grinch, Re: "You apparently have problems with plain logic."
<snicker> It's just funny coming from the most stubborn person I've ever had the displeasure of conversing with.
Re: "If some outdated accounting practice does not require to show the buybacks as expense, it does not mean that Intel makes that money out of vaccuum."
If you look back to the link that I already posted several times, you'll notice that while Intel spent money to buy back stock, they still had a positive cash flow for their bottom line. If you still fail to recognize that after all this time, you're just hopeless.
Re: "If you spend more than you earn, you have losses. Which part of this simple common-sense checkbook balance you refuse to understand?"
You seem unable to understand that Intel is not losing more than it is earning. Look at the cash flow yourself.
Re: "Also, where did you learn to quote out of context? Why don't you quote the following sentence: "Thus, companies that count on options to recruit and keep employees are understating labor costs and overstating earnings.""
You happen to be taking another person's opinion and quoting it, just because it fits your own opinion. Just because someone wrote it down, that doesn't make it correct.
Re: "When you "overstate" your "earning" into positive territory when the actual earnings are a huge loss, and the loss is sustained for more than several quarters, how should shareholders call this process, what do you think?"
I think that as a non-share holder, your interest in this is purely based on spreading FUD. Not unusual for a Grinch such as yourself.
wbmw |
