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: rkral who wrote (173312)	3/6/2003 11:12:23 AM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "Do you have data showing percentage of options held (or granted to) executives for different companies?" To:steve harris who wrote (93374) From: Windsock Wednesday, Feb 19, 2003 8:51 PM Respond to of 93758 MorningStar's 10 Worst Value Destroyers.... news.morningstar.com

To: rkral who wrote (173312)	3/7/2003 10:45:08 AM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Ron: A few comments: In general I think turning the options debate in to whether the upper level execs or the rank and file get the options, is a red herring debate, that is much less important than the simple fact that technology companies have a great deal of unreported compensation expense inflating their reported earnings. And of course, some companies are reporting much more inflated earnings than others. I have posted both Intel's Core Earnings and GAAP earnings adjusted for SFAS on this thread several times, and I am in agreement that the impact of expensing options on Intel earnings would be much less dramatic than it would be for many other tech companies (Siebel for example) ---at least for some of the recent time periods that I have looked at. Here are earnings figures again for Intel that I have posted here in the past: Fiscal Year GAAP EPS GAAP EPS w/ SFAS Op Exp 12/31/99 $1.05 $0.99 12/31/00 $1.51 $1.40 12/31/01 $0.19 $0.04 As far as whether executives are overpaid for companies, generally speaking, this requires some subjective judgment, but as you must certainly be aware, I have posted a great deal of data demonstrating the tremendous growth of executive compensation relative to the rank and file. Here it is again. Please refer to numbers 3 and 4. #reply-18514942 As far as Intel specifically, it seemed to me that Carl has posted some valid questions as to why some of those in the fold deserved the kind of the money they are receiving, but again, this is a subjective judgment. Imo, Andy Grove is one of the few great execs in Silicon Valley, having led Intel to greatness in the days before many tech companies relied on trumped up earnings to achieve greatness in perception rather than greatness in reality. One thing that bothers me about Intel, however, is that I seem to recall that Intel is one of the companies leading the charge to frame the important issue in the option debate as being the relative percentage of options going to rank and file versus the percentage going to executives. This concerns me, because it only serves to detract from the real debate---unreported compensation expense and inflated reported earnings. Personally, I don't appreciate unreported compensation expenses going to engineers much more than I appreciate unreported compensation expense going to execs. It is all unreported compensation expense that belongs on the income statement imo. Regards, Huey