Ali, re "Actually, it is $32,112M, 1996-2003 inclusive, check your math if you are so picky."
My number is based on the following, taken directly from Intel 10-K filings. Would be so kind as to pinpoint the year in which your data differs?INTC Common Stock Repurchased (millions)
Year Retained
Ending Shares CS&APIC Earnings Total
Dec-03 176 $2,064 $1,948 $4,012
Dec-02 183 2,127 1,887 4,014
Dec-01 133 1,667 2,341 4,008
Dec-00 74 1,160 2,847 4,007
Dec-99 142 1,076 3,536 4,612
Dec-98 324 1,124 4,462 5,586
Dec-97 176 311 3,061 3,372
Dec-96 136 269 925 1,194
Totals 1,344 9,798 21,007 30,805
re "Also, I don't care much about conforming to some artificial rules, FASB or not FASB, I just want some fairness within available information. "
If any organization in the U.S. has been fighting for fairness in accounting for options expensing, it's the FASB. And why would you discard the rules of a board that sets accounting standards followed by all public companies and accounting firms in the country?
re "As you might see, the whole intent of current reporting is to hide the real information about real scale of un-accounted labor compensation."
If it weren't for the FASB, we wouldn't have had the options disclosures we've seen since 1995. And if Congress hadn't interfered back in 1994-95, the FASB would have mandated options expensing then, instead of just disclosures.
re ""lies" and "true lies""
That's nonsensical talk IMO.
Ron |
