Ron, "No need to estimate an average price below the lowest price of the quarter ... or slip a decimal point 3 places."
oh, that sarcasm... the units in reports are always confusing,
kilo-shares, mega-shares. It is not the point, and $$ value
does not change much because of my slip.
You asked a question about the number of bought-back
shares, I tried to quick guessmate. Then you found
the answer yourself, thank you.
"I don't think [ed: 30 million] options exercised is at all reasonable. Dell did not disclose shares outstanding at the end of the quarter ...
I have somewhat different impression from this:
dell.com
(a link from your own link):
Jan 05 - 2485M basic shares,
Apr 05 - 2456M basic shares.
It is 29M shares less, while, as you found, they
bought back 50+ M shares. The difference is 21+ M shares.
Does 20 million sound more reasonable to you now?
20M x $40 = $1.6B in underreported labor compensation,
effectively.
"... and does not use the term "float"."
Who gives a duck? Float, or "weighted average shares
outstanding"?
"Were we talking expensing options, I would agree ... since Dell uses the intrinsic value method for options, which yields $0 expense."
No. I am talking about real costs of doing business.
You continue to nitpick and hide your head in deceptive
formalities of creative accounting. And the cost is real
despite of all creativity - the shareholder equity dropped
from $6485M to $5624M, a $861M drop. The drop would be
bigger if it was not offset by sales of some investments,
amounted to $2.7B.
I think you have to admit that you are essentially wrong on
all accounts. Your nitpicking and dazzling with imaginary
accuracy of your constructions is misplaced - there is no
accuracy in political/financial carefully-engineered
statements, and never been, IMO.
- Ali |
