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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GST who wrote (145711)	8/18/2002 10:45:59 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

...when it becomes mandatory to expense options in a couple of year's time. It's "a couple of year's time" now? What happened to six months? Just knock between $3 and $5 billion off the earnings of csco for each of the past 3 years... Figure if you keep repeating it over and over again it will become accepted as fact? Anyone who has read CSCO's annual report and also knows how to work a calculator to add up three years worth of options expenses knows that the actual number is $3.35 billion total for 1999-2001. Just to help you out with the math, that's about $1.1 billion per year. Well, at least you came down from your "it's right there in black and white" $95 billion loss for last year alone. BTW, $3.35 billion is still a VERY large portion of their reported earnings over those three years. Do you really think exaggerating the number is necessary to make your case about the significance of the expense for CSCO? Do you really think your exaggeration helps your case in any way?