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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (127187)	2/25/2003 10:58:35 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Nice post Darfot. I agree that a long of long term damage has been to our system by greedy CEOs. I also think requiring expensing stock options would be a huge step in the right direction towards getting us back on our feet. this post has nothing to do with QCOM Yes, despite asking Maurice for the details, I don't think we really have a very good understanding regarding stock option compensation for the for the top execs at QCOM. Of course I could research this, but I thought perhaps Maurice already had. Instead, I did a little research tonight involving stock option expense for the entire company. Stock option expense for the entire company for the last five fiscal years per SFAS 123 (which measures share value at grant and then amortizes the expense over the vesting periods) totaled roughly 607 million. Reported GAAP earnings for the last five fiscal years, which don't include stock option expense, totaled roughly 712 million. So if QCOM reported all the expenses on their income statements, there wouldn't be much left at all for shareholders from the last five fiscal years. However, I think QCOM is one of the companies that could do OK if stock options were expensed. They have a solid business model. I suspect they could curb stock options, manage for shareholder value and make a nice go of it in the long run. Regards, Huey

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (127187)	4/4/2003 7:50:10 PM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 152472

I share many of your sentiments as they are expressed. Unfortunately what I thought in 1999 were a minority of rogue CEOs seems to have evolved into the modern platform of doing business. I dont understand why the mutual funds and the pension plans who are really the large investors for the most part just acquiesce to this wholesale looting of companies. An unfortunate corollory of this is that poor management of companies doesnt seem to hurt the managers anymore they seem to be able at will to exchange underwater options for better priced ones or even for outright share grants ( Jobs at Apple). If a company looks like it might go belly-up (delta). they simply have the company put funds on their behalfs into trusts that ensure their pension rights in the event of bankruptcy. And of course we have the golden parachutes. One company that I speculated on whose share value plummeted by more than 99%, and who has yet to show a business plan that can make money continues to shower its ceo with bonus money. I dont see why investors will ever return to the stock market in a meaningful way. until they establish some legally binding corporate governance and make actual shareholders directors and not some ex-ceo who would never put in a dime of his own money as a shareholder, or some ex-politician who can wait to exercise and cash out his annual allotment of options. They need to take about 200 Ceos and directors and throw them into jail, strip them of their assets and return them to shareholders- before I will have any confidence at all in a long term share investment.