You seems to just 'talk'.
Actually I type. No voice recognition software on this computer. ;-)
If you are able to find the numbers, use Yahoo or MSN, and simple division, multiplication, addition and subtraction skill will do the trick.
Therein lies the problem. There's nothing "simple" about corporate accounting. Nor is there anything "simple" about microeconomic or macroeconomic models. You tend to throw around a lot of numbers yourself without documenting them. You also haven't accounted for the fact that several currently outstanding options will expire underwater, and unused in your modeling (remember, Intel's largest gains in headcount came when the stock was very high). Nor have you factored in future earnings or any potential upside in the stock.
Instead it appears as if you took a zero sum model, assumed all outstanding options would be exercised, and assumed that there is no upside to the stock, and drew "revelations" from it, and started "evangelizing" and accusing Intel senior management of malfeasance.
A fair and balanced analysis would have covered the range of possibilities and highlighted the potential risks and gains based on current economic forces. Instead it seems as if you started with a conclusion, and that conclusion dictated what evidence made it past your filters. Generally I've found that the more preconceptions an individual has, the "simpler" the experiment to "prove" the individual's conclusions is... |
