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: The Duke of URL© who wrote (172923)	2/8/2003 1:56:25 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Duke, The proxies I looked at contain the quantity, exercise price, and expiration date of that year's handouts of the five biggest wheels. I haven't found anything yet for the other lunch club members except when they close the position. :) Steve

To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (172923)	2/8/2003 2:19:46 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Duke, Re: And some of these answers can't really be disclosed, even to a shareholder, BUT the exercise price can and should be. I don't know it the new SEC rules require disclosure filings at grant date, or just closer to the exercise date. Don't you agree? Yes, I believe there is some common ground between us on this issue. Like I said, I'm all for reform, especially if it involves disclosure of executive compensation. I don't believe that employee compensation should be disclosed, however, since that's a fundamental competitive policy that Intel has for their workforce. Bringing the topic back to what I want to find out: is there anything criminal going on at Intel? Are execs truly getting overcompensated at the detriment of the shareholders? I believe those are all very valid concerns, but I have a problem with the way Carl and you have been going about answering it. Carl's questions have come very close to simple baseless accusations. He has become erratic, and you are defending him. If you want to address the issue in a logical manner, then I am willing to learn from it. But let's not jump to conclusions. I see no proof that Intel has acted criminally so far.

To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (172923)	2/9/2003 7:46:55 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Duke, RE: "BUT the exercise price can and should be (disclosed.)" Grant prices are - at least, I found them when I was reading Edgar. I also found a sentence (I think in the proxy) that said Intel issues options at fair market value. RE: "I don't know it the new SEC rules require disclosure filings at grant date, or just closer to the exercise date." Grant date, of course, I would think. One SEC ruling I think they should create for all public companies: require filing 5 days in advance of exec transactions. (Not that I think this is an issue with Intel, but I'd like to see it for the small public companies where there can be potential for weird stuff. An SEC rule couldn't single out just small companies, but if it were applied to all public companies, that would do the trick.) There's nothing worse than an exec of a startup (where it of course has more impact) sell his/her stock on the unsuspecting public market and tank it with no impact to him/her. I thought there was going to be some new SEC rule to fix that? I think the SEC should require the top-most execs to hold onto a certain percent of their stock. In the engineering world this is called, eating your own dog food. I prefer if an exec accumulates millions in shares because they have faithfully held onto a certain percent, but it seriously bugs me to see an exec dump all of his/her shares every single year. Doesn't build confidence. Makes you want to toss the guy/gal out. Regards, Amy J