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 38.16+2.5%Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: GVTucker who wrote (165126)5/14/2002 1:40:02 PM
From: The Duke of URL©  Read Replies (1) of 186894
 
Thank you. But, aren't these the disclosures that were outlined by the "Watkins Memo" of transactions that should have been disclosed up to two or three YEARS earlier?

This certainly as you suggest is in some sense "disclosure" but was it reflected in prior years stated diluted shares?

Those were years that the transactions were arguable not disclosed at all and when the stock was trading at 80. As the truth "leaked out" the stock then proceeded down to zero.

You are correct that there was some mention in middle 2001, after the fact, but the argument could be made, not by me certainly, but that this "disclosure" was more of an attempt to obfuscate rather than to disclose. True disclosure might have been, "that this transaction(s) resulted in 1.2 Billion in excess income and that this may have been the sole purpose of the transaction" or words to that effect?

The only way I could excuse my negligence for not spotting this language it that I must have examined the 10's that were simultaneous to determine whether there was disclosure, and I probably ignored the subsequent 10's.

GV, were you following this company at the time???

Thank you again for your excellent research.

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