To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (113464 ) 7/19/2001 6:29:14 PM From: Knight Read Replies (3) | Respond to You are right in assuming that analysts are clever enough to make the foreign currency to dollar adjustments and figure out from IBM's reports what the revenues meant in dollars. If so, why is it not true that they were incapable of adjusting reporting from dollars (which is the currency their accounting is actually based on) into foreign currencies. only currency-adjusted numbers. The dollar-based reporting was already released, so the analysts didn't need to make any adjustment.It's not disingenuous if: 2) If it's done when the dollar is weakening (we'll see) 3) If expenses are also handled in "constant currency" (they weren't) not hold individual shares of IBM; however, I didn't view the way they reported their results as dishonest. Overall, it seemed rather balanced (they highlighted some weaknesses as well as strengths) though, perhaps, not as candid as SEBL's. In that context, I thought the objections here about "constant currency" seemed overblown. I don't normally follow this thread, so perhaps I'm missing something with IBM. Would you care to elaborate on how they've been dishonest in their accounting, etc. (or point me to posts, etc. that have this information). Thanks.
