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: hueyone who wrote (173561)	3/14/2003 12:01:19 PM
From: carl a. mehr	Respond to of 186894

In some respects, I think it is entirely possible that a FASB decision to expense stock options would be a blessing in disguise for Intel, and perhaps get them back on track to managing for legitimate shareholder value---like they unquestionably did for many years. Thanks, well said!...humble carl

To: hueyone who wrote (173561)	3/14/2003 12:14:29 PM
From: rkral	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

OT ... Huey, re "Imo, companies like Intel will be better off by facing the music now, and expensing stock options on the income statement now. I think Intel still has an opportunity to run a sound stock options policy before things get totally out of hand." I share those opinions. The financial markets and the U.S. economy will be better off as well. Indeed, if Senator Joe Lieberman, and others, had not killed mandatory option expensing back in 1995, the stock market bubble and bust might have been much less severe. And reasonable option programs can be continued without ill effects, as you say. Regards, Ron

To: hueyone who wrote (173561)	3/14/2003 12:23:53 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Its hard to have a discussion with you on this topic, because we both know that you know what I mean, but you twist my sentences into whatever you want them to say. So it seems that we may finally beginning to reach a period where it could be construed that employees are forcing companies to expense stock options in a sense---by demanding cash instead of options. No hueyone, options are exactly that- options. In other words they MIGHT be worth something or they might not. Completely different from cash. Its kindof like buying a lottery ticket, you give up cash- but owning a lottery ticket is not the same as an immediate million dollars in your pocket. I'm tired of stating these obvious facts. I am in agreement with Carl that going down the road of merrily increasing the grant rate to the inner circle is a very disturbing trend that can lead to bad results for everyone concerned, Right so taking a company you feel is going down the correct road- Oracle, notice the approach was to dump R&D to india but of course this had no effect on the number of options Larry gets. Just like John Chambers so elequently pointed out on many occasions, the issue needed to be solved for those companies that do excessive grants at the top. Thats not what this blind creation of arbitrary "expenses" does, it just throws out the baby with the bathwater. Anyway no matter, at least you aren't like rkral and going into a denial phase as if outsourcing R&D isn't necessary now. Outsourcing R&D IS the solution. At least we have one. I think it is entirely possible that a FASB decision to expense stock options would be a blessing in disguise for Intel, and perhaps get them back on track to managing for legitimate shareholder value--- At the expense of anything visionary coming out of the company, of course. Because vision generally comes from the ranks of R&D. Not that it matters to the beancounters, they think Warren Buffet is a visionary! LOL.