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 : Zeev's Turnips - No Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SBHX who wrote (61839)	5/4/2002 10:51:27 PM
From: westpacific	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99280

INSP, we be Trillion Dollar Company - .99 cents/306M this sucker going to .25 easy!!!!

To: SBHX who wrote (61839)	5/5/2002 10:37:43 AM
From: Joseph Beltran	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99280

Of course stock options should be expensed. Throughout the tech boom corporate boards routinely would justify the granting of extravagant options by climing that options "did not" cost the company anything. That statement was as ridiculous as the statement of many analysts, ceos, etc. claiming that profits were "not important" and, in the case of one ceo (pino of former actm) that "cash flow" was "not important". There is little doubt in my mind that if options had been properly "expensed" during the boom period, the great majority of tech companies would have reported negative earnings. More evidence that the vast majority of pubblic companies in America today (especially among the techs) are public in name only. In essence they remain the private vehicles for the enrichment of a select few.