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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hightechhooper who wrote (125935)	1/24/2001 5:41:32 PM
From: John Hull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

HTH, re:"This problem did not exist when Andy Grove was in charge.' With all due respect, and please don't be offended, but I've got to call B.S. on this statement. Periodic kicking of Intel by the analysts happened when ASG was in charge too. And he exercised and sold his stock options on a regular basis too. And it didn't keep the stock from going up (or down) either. I have great empathy for you and your suffering over the current stock price - I too own a bunch of INTC. But thinking that Intel can 'investor relations lipservice' itself out of the current position is chasing a mirage. Trust me on this - I did the IR job for Intel from 1995-97. By the way, your "normal financial market and industry conditions" equilibrium state does not exist....another mirage. regards, jh

To: Hightechhooper who wrote (125935)	1/25/2001 4:06:31 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi HTH and GV, RE: "improve its image in the financial community" Intel's PE has been higher in the past few years, which would counter your (HTH's) implied suggestion re a perceived inability to improve its image. Re selling stock, it appears Intel uses non-qual stock options, which are absolutely the worse kind of stock options to own, because they require the individual to pay taxes on the exercise day at the income tax rate. Microsoft has (or at least had) ISOs, which are much better for employees by a factor equal to (50% - cap gains %) * (1.40)**(#yrs held), I believe (but am not certain) that translates into approximately 10Xs better, assuming equal % ownership in the stock grant and an equivalent stock return over the past decade. So, if INTC yielded a 1619% return in 10 years, while MSFT yielded a 1035% return, I believe the adjusted-comparison return of a non-qual holder would be 1/10th of an ISO holder, which could translate into 162% adjusted-comparison for a non-qual holder. My calculation neglects AMT, so take it with a grain of salt, but the main point is: non-quals aren't good for the holder. Why does Intel use non-quals? Is the gain to Intel that significant? What exactly is the amount of this gain and what is the price/share difference? Regards, Amy J