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 : Semi Equipment Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Ox who wrote (4272)	7/24/2002 1:00:18 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95383

<What he is suggesting is that many companies have hidden their exposure to options from their shareholders> No a thousand times over. The cost of the options is reflected in the Fully Diluted EPS. Which factors in exerciseable options.

To: The Ox who wrote (4272)	7/24/2002 1:09:55 PM
From: Rock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95383

Micheal, you are dead on. The issue is not about the granting of options as compensatory or motivational drivers being a good or bad thing. The issue is about openly accounting for the expense of the options that you choose to grant.

To: The Ox who wrote (4272)	7/24/2002 1:12:04 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Respond to of 95383

Most of the companies I own report stock buy back plans and actual costs of buy backs. They also report the number of shares outstanding. The buy backs are used for employee options. These dynamics are reflected in cash and book and treasury stock on the balance sheet. I am all for transparency and I have invested in technology because I can believe that honest above average returns are likely here. I don't think that expensing options is the best way to make them transparent. I think a public list of the number of options granted and the strike prices and expiration dates is sufficient.