Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 36.85

0.0%

10:43 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (174686)	5/21/2003 9:14:23 PM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (2) of 186894

Lizzie, RE: Not exactly an outright damning statement against options, imo. To me, this is alarmist just like when people here accuse Cisco and Intel of cooking the books when they don't expense options. Expensing options has nothing to do whether you're for or against options as a compensation tool. Greenspan is unambiguously for expensing stock options on the income statement. As far as whether they are good or bad, that's best left up to the market. If options are the horrible thing that some (incorrectly, IMO) believe they are, then the market will punish the companies that reward stock options to its employees and stock options will fade from view. If awarding stock options to employees helps a company innovate and thrive, the market will reward those companies and the practice of awarding stock options will continue. As far as the events of 1994 and options are concerned, there is no question in my mind (nor anyone else's, at least among the few of us that actually followed it closely then) that the sole reason that Congress intimidated the FASB into backing down on stock options expensing was pork, primarily Silicon Valley pork.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next