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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (121162)	7/2/2002 6:37:01 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I was expecting "a classic column ..." to be a trick leading us to another URL for an astronomy photo. Jon.

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (121162)	7/2/2002 8:26:19 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Respond to of 152472

QCOM Qualcomm downgraded to Mkt Perform at Hambrecht-- estimates too high (26.43) WR Hambrecht downgrades to MKT PERFORM from Buy on view that FY03 consensus estimates are too high. Though QCOM preannounced a strong Q3, firm believes excess 1X chipset inventory could dampen Q4 chipset shipments.

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (121162)	7/2/2002 8:30:10 AM
From: kech	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Funny Krugman didn't mention the $50k he got as a "columnist on retainer" for Enron since his focus is on conflict of interest. Guilt by association applies to all republicans but the same standard doesn't apply to himself.

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (121162)	7/2/2002 9:23:33 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

How credible is Pitt as a former attorney who represented the big accounting firms. He knows his tenure is limited. Why should he rock the boat and the prospects for more riches after his term is over? Like putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank.

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (121162)	7/2/2002 9:44:43 AM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Nor did he bother mention that Clinton and Senator Joseph Lieberman, who will do anything for a buck from Silicon Valley, led the charge to kill FASB's recommendation to expense stock options back in 1994---which subsequently resulted in the spiraling out of control, legalized embezzlement we had going on in those executive suites the next eight years. Message 17249383 And so, the FASB voted in April 1993 to require companies to treat options as an expense, based on the estimated future value of those options. The vote produced a political tsunami that started in Silicon Valley, gathered force in Washington, and slammed into Norwalk, Conn., where the accounting board is based. The Clinton administration weighed in against the FASB. So did institutional-investor groups, who said the rule change would muddy financial statements. A nonbinding resolution opposing the FASB rule change passed the Senate by a vote of 88-9. Its sponsor, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, later proposed legislation that would have, in effect, put the FASB out of business. The Business Roundtable, a group made up of major corporate leaders, threatened to refuse to adhere to FASB decisions. By the end of 1994, the FASB withdrew the rule, deciding instead that companies would have to disclose the value of their options only in a footnote in their annual reports. At the time, Silicon Valley was starting to power the strongest U.S. economy in a generation and a bull market in stocks, and nobody was in the mood to tinker with success. It's a huge stretch to suggest that corporate malfeasance is solely a Republican problem; the fact is that politicians from both sides of the aisle have been sufficiently bribed by the likes of the Larry Ellisons of the world to do nothing on our behalfs---especially with regard to expensing stock options. Best, Huey