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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (84953)	7/16/2002 1:02:16 PM
From: TGPTNDR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Petz, Re: <"pro forma." Pro forma leaves a bad taste in my mouth, that's for sure.> There for a while it was getting to be 'what ever the company wanted to report' earnings, then the write-offs and 'real earnings' came out on the 10-Q a month later. But it's good for the earnings contest as it allows one to attempt to guess 'just how big are these guys balls, anyway'. And it's good for the traders 'cause it provides volatility. -tgp

To: Petz who wrote (84953)	7/16/2002 2:39:35 PM
From: ptanner	Respond to of 275872

Petz, re: "I wonder whether the analysts will begin predicting GAAP earnings in Intel's case and ignore "pro forma." For Intel the difference between GAAP and their "pro forma" was only one cent last quarter and should remain small. The only difference between them was acquisition-related costs. Both results included the first half of the Intergraph payment which was recorded as a cost of sales. So I don't know whether analysts include the approximately one cent acquisition-related charges. IMHO Intel should do away with this distinction since it is so small. -PT