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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (62712)	1/17/2003 1:34:36 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 77400

Yes, theoretically the reduction in net income by stock option expense should reduce free cash flow, but there are some who argue that since stock option expense is a non cash expense, they would add it back in to free cash flow, much in the same manner as we add depreciation and amortization expense back in to free cash flow. In my opinion, those who argue such, are mainly looking for another excuse to continue to overstate the performance of tech companies. Regards, Huey

To: RetiredNow who wrote (62712)	1/17/2003 1:55:40 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 77400

I wish some of the options expensing proponents would take their approach, and apply it to the siebel quarterly results for the 97-2002 period. Show me how options that were expensed would affect the numbers then and now. If there is an options expensing strategy that makes sense of what really happened at siebel in real time (meaning- the results show that things were really, really good in 99 and really, really bad now from a business standpoint having nothing to do with options).. then I would likely support it. The problem is every proposal I see really clouds the actual picture, I agree with John Chambers that whatever these "expenses" are they need to be proforma'd out so investors can see whats really going on.