Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fun-da-Mental#1 who wrote (26283)	9/19/1999 10:56:00 AM
From: Benkea	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

OT - MSFT divies. I think most know that MSFT NEEDS to keep large amounts of cash on hand to cover the huge number of puts it is naked to lower the cost of the NECESSARY share buyback (of ridiculously priced stock) to partially off-set the HUGE dilutive affect of the 892 mil options outstanding with an average strike of $11 15/16. How profitable is MSFT? You first need to subtract 892 mil X $11.94 ($10.7 BIL) in off income statement expenses. That $10.7 bil is equal to the entire after tax net income for the last three years! I think it is safe to say that at $1/2 a trillion, MSFT is priced very reasonably considering it is UNPROFITABLE after options for the last three years. On last thing, adding the 900 mil shares into the market cap (which SHOULD BE DONE), MSFT is really closer to $600 bil in market cap. Head over to the "South Sea" and get your "tulips".

To: Fun-da-Mental#1 who wrote (26283)	9/19/1999 1:52:00 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

OT If not for the government action against MSFT there would be ZIPPO to charity. Why the sudden generosity now. Charity contributors give steady over their life time. Any one with some common sense will notice. Now just imagine if racketering charges would be filed now against the most famous mobster of this century?? Oh well you come to the conclusion. Over history every white collar criminal started to give to charity and make it very public for all to know wen the government was about to get their neck. Do not want to mention names but even country Presidents are not excluded. BWDIK Haim

To: Fun-da-Mental#1 who wrote (26283)	9/19/1999 2:19:00 PM
From: Matthew L. Jones	Respond to of 99985

At the risk of sounding like a Bill Gates fan, I think dividends is one of the worst things a profitable company can do with earnings. If a shareholder buys stock to get a dividend, they should consider buying a utility stock or even a bond fund. If the objective is capital appreciation, it makes much more sense to see a well managed company take pre-tax earnings and reinvest by constantly acquiring smaller, cutting edge growth companies, or in the absence of acquisitions which make good business sense, the buying back of common stock. Paying dividends is merely distributing profits after taxes. I would much prefer my distributions before taxes as in acquisitions and/or stock repurchases. Just one guy's opinion. Matt

To: Fun-da-Mental#1 who wrote (26283)	9/19/1999 2:49:00 PM
From: TimbaBear	Respond to of 99985

Whenever I evaluate whether a company ought to pay me dividends, the question I ask is this: "What kind of return will they earn on that money if they don't pay it to me?"....if their return on invested capital is less than mine, then I either want the money in the form of dividends, or I'll buy another company who gives a better return on retained earnings. I don't have the figures handy, but I seem to remember that MSFT had some outrageously high return on retained earnings and so it makes sense to let them reinvest the profits....I am not an owner of MSFT.