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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave who wrote (168187)	7/14/2002 3:55:20 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

"argument should not be about whether stock options should be expensed, or whatnot. The true argument should be whether companies can issue "pro forma" numbers. That, in my opinion, is the problem" Nah, but as you correctly point out, it is important to note that all these accounting thingys are each separate issues. The are a thousand of them that come up for one company every year. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE CPA'S SAY THAT THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHARACTARIZATION OF THE REPORTS. To paraphrase Buffett, if the accountants are not responsible for the numbers who is?? No legislature can retroactively solve this problem but passing specific laws, they are too corrupt. IF the accountants and the companies were held responsible by individuals every day and could possibly be sued, they would do the best they can. And a court would decide if they were right. What would happen is what used to happen, 15 years ago. The company booked the item and the accountant would try his best to determine if this is correct. If there were any substantial question, it would be stated one way, with an explanation as to the other way. A CLEAR EXPLANATION, NOT OBFUSCATORY BULLSHIT. In court, vague explanations are no explanations.