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 36.55

-0.8%

12:49 PM 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 11:27:20 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Lizzie, strange that you neglected to highlight this line too: However, the amount of waste becomes unnecessarily large when the earnings reports that help investors allocate investment are inaccurate. Isn't selective editing great? By simply ignoring what you don't want to admit someone says, you can cling to whatever opinion you'd like as if they hold it too. Unfortunately, by picking Greenspan to support your position that options are a good thing and shouldn't be expensed, you are backing the wrong horse. Greenspan, Levitt and a host of others are absolutely of the opinion that the intrinsic value method of accounting for employee stock options distorts the reported profitability of the firm. And it does. Any person with the intellectual integrity to separate their own self-interest from facts can see this. Expensing of stock options doesn't make stock options a bad thing. It will make the cost that shareholders are being asked to bear something that shareholders will want to question. This isn't to say that the personal vested interests (salary) of our captains of industry isn't threatened. It is. But isn't the salary of our captains of industry completely defensible? And this isn't to say that the wage structure in the tech economy hasn't become artificially inflated and won't come under review. But again, if it survives the review, then it was fair. And don't you think any reasonable mind reviewing the salary structure will have to conclude it's fair? This isn't to say that an industry hasn't relied quite aggressively in the use of stock options when it comes to raising capital. But if the cost is justified, why wouldn't the practice continue? If there are legitimate answers to the questions, then no problem. If options are so necessary like everyone thinks, then they'll continue to be doled out by the bucket load after companies have to expense 'em. It's only if they aren't so necessary that their use will be curtailed. Why are you worried? John

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next