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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Boca_PETE who wrote (14760)	7/14/2001 3:51:08 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

pete, two questions... 1. when a company uses options to pay a bill, i understood you to say they would count as an expense. how can you have it both ways? 2. why should the company get a deduction for something that isn't an "expense." (it REALLY is, but we'll pretend it isn't, wink, wink ;-) just a comment, warren buffett has proved to be the best investor in history. i think he knows quite a bit about valuing companies and the accounting that underpins the valuation process. his problem is that he sees the BIG pictures, not the loop holes, errr, "bonanza" to use your words. he is serious when he says that economically his non option system is equal to the option system. equal. think equal sign. however, b/c of this accounting flaw, the NUMBERS turn out very different. there is a PROBLEM when you have a model that falls short. now, i understand why companies appreciate a good "bonanza" to use to manipulate their numbers. it isn't right, though. you obviously disagree. taking this to its LOGICAL conclusion, i can't wait to see a company pay all expenses with stock and tell everyone that "profits" equal revenue. you'd be in a state of euphoria at the size of that "bonanza!" ;-) in the end, i'm on the side of honesty, integrity and consistency, not "bonanza" hunting.