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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (5538)	7/25/2000 9:33:22 AM
From: IceShark	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Ok, here is where you are getting off track. While it may not effect the total mass of the bag of marbles, it does affect the count and individual mass of each marble. The individual marbles multiplied but got smaller. And if you, the stockholder, own an individual marble, you just lost some mass in that divide action. I'm done with this subject, since the rest of the market basically looks at it the same way you do so there is no point arguing it.

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (5538)	7/25/2000 9:36:33 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

<[...If an option is not an expense, what is it?...] It is a restructuring of the ownership.> But these options are given away to retain talented workers... so they clearly also belong in the salary expense category! <If I give away partial ownership of my bag of marbles it does NOT affect the count of the marbles in the bag.> You keep talking about this... see my previous post... giving stock to a new employee reduces the marbles for the 'existing' shareholders just as a cash bonus would. Your assertion that options have no economic value is incorrect. DAK

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (5538)	7/25/2000 11:58:51 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

I think you're right - in this case giving stock to vendors rather than paying them is not an expense but a dilution of shareholder's equity. With more shares outstanding, they would have lower earnings per share with the same revenue. The deceptiveness here is that Internut companies aren't judged by earnings per share. Actually, I don't know how they are supposed to be judged, but at any rate, the gross revenues ought to increase if they don't have expenses.