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: Knighty Tin who wrote (87634)	12/27/2000 11:10:19 PM
From: SeaViewer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

MB: What do you think about NETA at this level, around $4? It still has a lot of cash.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (87634)	12/28/2000 12:06:52 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

MB, what do you make of this? Apparently from GS... Message 15089179 December 20, 2000 ALL GOODWILL AMORTIZATION TO CEASE; "CASH EPS" CONCEPT ABANDONED Background As discussed in our On Call Bulletin of December 7, 2000 and numerous press articles, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the "FASB") has tentatively decided that goodwill will no longer be systematically amortized against earnings, but rather written off to expense only when its value has been determined to have been impaired. This announcement raised several side issues, the most intriguing of which was: What will happen to existing goodwill, including goodwill on acquisitions that are being worked on now and may be closed or even just announced before a final new Statement is released? Current Events At today's meeting, the FASB came to several more tentative decisions regarding goodwill accounting issues. (Note our description of both the December 6th and 20th decisions as "tentative" because the process is ongoing as discussed below; there could be revisions or modifications.) The Decisions 1. All existing goodwill will cease being amortized as of the effective date of the Statement, and reviewed for impairment as of that date and subsequently. Further discussion on the effective date is included below. 2. Some specifically identified intangible assets will be treated similarly to goodwill. Recall that the September, 1999 Exposure Draft provided for certain intangibles to be carried without amortization and the final Statement is expected to expand that population. If a company is already carrying such intangibles on its balance sheet, the currently-required amortization of them will also cease and impairment evaluation commence. 3. The concept of "cash EPS" (or, more precisely, the subtotal for "earnings from continuing operations before goodwill amortization") that was an element of the FASB's prior proposal contained in their September, 1999 Exposure Draft has been abandoned. Goodwill impairment writedowns, when required, will be an element of earnings before tax. We believe the FASB intends to have such writedowns as an element of operating earnings, but the level to which the Statement will go into such income statement geography remains to be seen. There is anticipated to be no ability, however, to present any subtotal, with or without a related EPS calculation, that excludes goodwill writedowns. 4. Specifics of the impairment reviews, both for newly recognized as well as existing goodwill being frozen by the Statement, were also discussed. After we have seen the FASB's official release on today's meeting, another On Call Bulletin devoted to the impairment issues will be forthcoming. What's Next (and Timing) The FASB decided that a revised Exposure Draft would be issued, but limited to the new decisions regarding goodwill amortization. They are shooting for: -- One more meeting to discuss some remaining goodwill-related issues (e.g., treatment of negative goodwill) on January 10, 2001 -- Release of a revised ED by late January or early February -- Short (30 day) comment period and no public hearings -- Final Statement to be released by June. Assuming this timetable is met, goodwill amortization will cease as of the beginning of the first quarter following the release of the Statement (i.e., July 1 for calendar-year companies). No revision of prior quarters is contemplated, although some guidance on pro forma information to be presented is expected. Whither Poolings? Remember that all these decisions are part of the FASB's standard "redeliberation" process after evaluating all the feedback received on its September, 1999 Exposure Draft, and that same Exposure Draft called for the complete elimination of pooling-of-interests accounting as of the release of the final Statement. This decision will also be "redeliberated" in a future meeting, probably in January, 2001. If, as anticipated, the decision to prohibit poolings is reaffirmed, transactions will need to be "initiated" (i.e., announced with major terms, including the exchange ratio or formula, agreed by the parties) by the end of June to be eligible under the current pooling rules.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (87634)	12/28/2000 12:26:30 AM
From: Don Lloyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

MB - A stolen post - funphone.com "FunPhone.com regrets to announce that it has ceased all production of fun, effective immediately. We have restructured our operations in a way that will make us quite lean and very mean. A few random calls will be connected manually by cheap labor in the Phillipines, but most of our customers will hear nothing at all when they use our service. The company hopes to generate additional revenue by selling the name, address and phone number of everyone who has ever visited the site to I-Want-Spam.com. As the company transitions to a post-salary situation, we are confident our many ex-employees will soon find other work in the telecommunications sector, possibly searching for change in public telephones. The Marketing Department has already been welcomed back by the perfume counter at Macy's...." "..."The last nail in our corporate coffin was the recent downgrade by Wall Street analyst Henri Blojet, from Mega-Cosmic Giganto Super-Neat Idea to Totally-Stinky Money-Sucking Nightmare. That hurt us. When Henri finally wakes up and downgrades a deal, you know it's over. ..." "..."We're just going to hunker down and wait it out, hoping for the next wave of easy money and naïve optimism, when the goatee is once again the universal symbol of business and technical acumen, it's impossible to park downtown, and you sound smart if you add words like space and going forward to every sentence." Added Bruce, "Our strategy going forward is to be a leader in the dead dot-com space. It's just like death in the real life space, it's not the end of the world or anything. We'll bounce back, going forward." ..." "...This page sponsored by the Margin Desk at Goldworth Grynch. "It's Our Money Now!"..." Regards, Don

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (87634)	12/28/2000 1:14:29 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

Michael, The Macneil-Lehrer Newshour ran a segment tonight on the conflict of interest that analysts who work for large brokerage firms have when recommending stocks; they dare not offend customers or potential customers of the investment banking division. Furthermore, they habitually recommend stocks of companies for whom their firm is doing offerings, without disclosing the conflict of interest. (No great surprise there). The segment included fairly lengthy interviews with Arthur Levitt of the SEC. This is the second major news piece I have seen on the topic in the last two weeks. My question is: Who is pushing this topic to the media? Arthur Levitt? and why now? wouldn't this information have been a lot more useful, say, three years ago, before so many small investors got fleeced listening to bubblevision? Is there an underlying motive or is the SEC just closing the barn door long after the horse has bolted? I was reminded of an interesting piece I recently read in the December Atlantic Monthly, about Robert Parker. Robert Parker is a highly influential wine critic, whose score literally set prices for many regions of winemakers, especially Bordeaux. The old wine-producing houses of Bordeaux hate his guts but have no way to undermine his influence, apparently. What is most interesting about Parker is that he is just a hardworking guy from Maryland with a prodigious palate and memory, who in a generally corrupt business does not take gifts from the vintners or negociants and is not afraid to say in his wine ratings whether the emperor does or does not have any clothes. I find it really interesting that the wine industry was so defenseless against one honest critic, while the defenses of Wall Street seem impenetrable. There are some honest critics, such as Fred Hickey, but they seem to have a hard time getting any air. Why is there no feedback loop in the media that actually rewards good advice and punishes bad? Where are the consumer advocates for investors?