Its hard to have a discussion with you on this topic, because we both know that you know what I mean, but you twist my sentences into whatever you want them to say.
So it seems that we may finally beginning to reach a period where it could be construed that employees are forcing companies to expense stock options in a sense---by demanding cash instead of options.
No hueyone, options are exactly that- options. In other words they MIGHT be worth something or they might not. Completely different from cash. Its kindof like buying a lottery ticket, you give up cash- but owning a lottery ticket is not the same as an immediate million dollars in your pocket. I'm tired of stating these obvious facts.
I am in agreement with Carl that going down the road of merrily increasing the grant rate to the inner circle is a very disturbing trend that can lead to bad results for everyone concerned,
Right so taking a company you feel is going down the correct road- Oracle, notice the approach was to dump R&D to india but of course this had no effect on the number of options Larry gets. Just like John Chambers so elequently pointed out on many occasions, the issue needed to be solved for those companies that do excessive grants at the top. Thats not what this blind creation of arbitrary "expenses" does, it just throws out the baby with the bathwater. Anyway no matter, at least you aren't like rkral and going into a denial phase as if outsourcing R&D isn't necessary now. Outsourcing R&D IS the solution. At least we have one.
I think it is entirely possible that a FASB decision to expense stock options would be a blessing in disguise for Intel, and perhaps get them back on track to managing for legitimate shareholder value---
At the expense of anything visionary coming out of the company, of course. Because vision generally comes from the ranks of R&D. Not that it matters to the beancounters, they think Warren Buffet is a visionary! LOL. |
