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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (47625)	10/7/2001 1:07:14 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

OK, it looks like the WSJ took all the written-off items on the pro-forma and reached its own views over the long run. Nowhere does the WSJ state that there were items written off which were not announced in the pro-forma or reported earnings. That would have been troublesome and legally significant. It appears that the WSJ simply looked over the history of write-offs, which included one-time write-offs related to the infra division sale, handset division sale, Globalstar, Vesper, etc., and applied them to earnings since the mid-90's. Recall that Q was ramping up in the mid-90s. To apply even a part of a Globalstar write-off of nearly $600m to earnings in the mid-90s is unfair for any number of reasons: The Q was a much smaller company in those days with significantly lesser earnings. How many companies write off past earnings with present charges? None of which I'm aware. The WSJ analysis is facile. I smell a hatchet job. The reasons for it, given the recent slide, would be worth looking into.