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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (82782)	8/9/2000 2:27:37 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Hi Don Lloyd; In addition to your complaints, his statement that employees pay W-2 on their stock options upon exercise is dependent on what type of options they are. -- Carl

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (82782)	8/9/2000 9:27:40 AM
From: Mike M2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Don, although company management seems to feel otherwise the shareholders are supposed to be the owners of the company - and when the shareholders money is spent buying back shares ( at historic high prices) to offset dilution from esops or their equity is diluted via generous option grants I do not feel that this is in the best interest of the shareholders -the owners of the company. In the old days surplus cash was paid out in the form of dividends and the dividend yield would act as a floor for the stock price. ATT - (T) had a 16% dividend yieldat the bottom in 1932. You raise many good issues but I feel the shareholders are being scammed in the long run. In the short run everyone is happy. Mike

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (82782)	8/9/2000 9:40:53 AM
From: Mike M2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Don, the clown thread consensus is the esop does NOT hit P&L in agreement with Tim Lamb. See Ice Message 14185917 see also rutgers.edu Mike

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (82782)	8/14/2000 1:52:26 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

don, a couple questions. first, if i'm a shareholder and my company loses a nickel b/c of dilution or b/c stock options ran down the income statement... what is the difference? i still lost a nickel in earnings and the value of my company is hurt. second, if my "debt" (electric bill, etc.) is paid in stock, does that make it non-debt? does the method of payment determine a debt or a non-debt? skeets

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (82782)	8/14/2000 1:53:58 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

don, a couple questions. first, if i'm a shareholder and my company loses a nickel b/c of dilution or b/c stock options ran down the income statement... what is the difference? i still lost a nickel in earnings and the value of my company is hurt. second, if my "debt" (electric bill, etc.) is paid in stock, does that make it non-debt? does the method of payment determine a debt or a non-debt? taking this to its logical conclusion, if 100% of employee compensation was derived from stock options, would employee expenses really be $0.00? why not run a company like this? skeets