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: Robert O who wrote (173372)	3/7/2003 11:17:38 AM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Robert: I should have said the impact of expensing options on Intel per SFAS at date of grant would be less dramatic on Intel than many other companies. Of course, SFAS measures the value of the option at date of grant and then amortizes this value over the vesting period of the options. Also, I should have looked at more than a three year time period. I am generally in agreement with the concept that share buybacks is another way to gauge stock option expense (as opposed to SFAS at date of grant)---if the share buybacks are doing nothing more than offsetting dilution from stock option exercise. I haven't looked at Intel closely enough yet to determine whether this is the case. Most CFOs are clever enough to buy back more shares than is necessary to offset dilution, thus the exercise of determining stock option expense via share buybacks gets more complicated. In these instances, I would guess that one would have to view a portion of the share buybacks as a reduction in shareholder wealth, that only gets shareholders back to their original percentage of the company owned, whereas another portion of the share buyback would have to be viewed as a return or wealth to shareholders, much like a dividend. Since I have a job I have to get back to; I don't have time to sort this out for Intel right now, but it is certainly a great question and a valid concern. Regards, Huey