Elmer,
I think it's a bit of a stretch to claim that Intel has purchased enough shares on the open market to cover all options they have ever granted but I think the point is valid at least over recent years.
Or in other words, Intel only started buying back the shares over the recent years, as employee exercises threatened dilution? But isn't it the same as saying that they are buying back shares that have been exercised, which is the opposite of what you are arguing.
So the point remains, why must we consider those exercised this year to be the same ones repurchesed this year?
Because it is the most intuitive?
I know some people want to make that association but it's not the only way to look at it ...
I am not saying that's the only way to look at it, there are some unusual ways to look at things, and your theory is unusual, but I must admit, interesting.
There are number of ways to look at financial performance of a company as well, number of different yardsticks, and one of the yardsticks is to include the cost of the stock repurchases (related to employee stock options). Under this yardstick, Intel lost money last quarter, and some people just want to rub it in.
... unless they have an agenda.
Agenda's go both ways.
BTW, GVTucker summarized well the controversy of how to look at earnings from different perspectives (he posted it on Intel thread), which is pretty much how I feel. (I don't have the link to the post).
Joe
PS: I think the market is going to take-off now. I sold all my shares. |
