To: ptanner who wrote (77329 ) 4/17/2002 2:55:36 AM From: Petz Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 275872 By not including any goodwill or goodwill impairments in this quarter's report, they are just doing what the SEC allows. But I find Intel's "comparative analysis" to be the lowest form of deceit except Enron in the last 12 months:First-quarter net income was $936 million, up 86 percent sequentially and up 93 percent year-over-year. (BULLSH!T) Earnings per share were $0.14, up 100 percent from $0.07 in both the first and fourth quarters of 2001. (BULLSH!T) In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), earnings in the 2001 periods reflect charges for the amortization of goodwill, which is no longer amortized in the current year with the adoption of FASB statement 142. By throwing that magic phrase in near the end, "in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles," the typical reader stops reading the rest of the sentence and says, "Wow, great, they doubled profits and it's not even some kind of pro-forma earnings." O really, Intel? How come when I visit your website I see the following headlines from your prior press releases?Intel Reports Fourth-Quarter And Annual Results Fourth-Quarter Earnings Excluding Acquisition-Related Costs* $0.15 Per Share and Intel Reports First Quarter Revenue of $6.7 Billion First Quarter Earnings Excluding Acquisition-Related Costs* $0.16 Per Share First Quarter Earnings Per Share $0.07 The SEC should definitely not allow any percentage comparisons between periods when different accounting standards are used. This is total hypocrisy. I really don't understand the aftermarket reaction. They exactly met expectations for both revenue and net income and they are giving such a wide range for Q2 than nothing new could be inferred from it. I think both Intel and AMD will be down tomorrow, even relative to today's official close of 29.51 and 14.35. Petz