RE: "Are you implying that the prices are getting artificially depressed?"
No, the price is artificially depressed because Wall Street holds that decision. However, I get prickly when a company issues options at a price on the back of a stumble.
RE: "I doubt that intel would do that."
No, Intel would not intentionally stumble. I don't think people like losing their jobs.
RE: "I have more of a problem with adjusting strike prices of granted options whenever the price is going down."
I actually don't, if the decline is due to a calamity like terrorism, war, or a once-in-a-lifetime bubble bursting. But reprices create an accounting issue, and there's a lot of negativity around reprices, so I'm not in favor of them. Issuing add-ons such as Intel did for employees over the past few years, doesn't create an accounting issue.
RE: "I also have a problem with expensing the options without clearly defining the economic value of those options."
I hope they present the old way as well as the new way, because I'm more used to the old way. The scenario that bugs me as an investor, is if a stock is undervalued but you don't know it because they are expensing some billions of options that won't get exercised.
Regards,
Amy J |
