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 : Employee Stock Options - NQSOs & ISOs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rkral who wrote (90)	6/20/2002 12:43:42 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 786

Sorry Ron, I understand perfectly well the context in which the accounting professor presented his opinions. Your ridiculous (and childish) tendency to relentlessly play games with semantics on this issue is taking away from larger, more important issues that this thread could be addressing. For example, JS just posted his suggestion as to how stock option compensation cost could be accounted for on financial statements provided to shareholders. How would you account for stock option compensation cost on the financial statements provided to shareholders and why? Message 17607616 Huey

To: rkral who wrote (90)	6/20/2002 1:18:15 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 786

Now we are getting some where: John believes the estimate provided at the grant date, by Black-Scholes or whatever, is not an actual cost. I believe it is. I believe that the estimate provided at the grant date (by Black-Scholes or whatever) is an ESTIMATE of the real cost, and that the ACTUAL value of the real cost is known precisely at exercise. The use of the word "estimate" is neither accidental nor erroneous. Of course, that's only my uncorroborated and possibly erroneous opinion. Feel free to adopt any other opinion you prefer. John