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: Stock Farmer who wrote (174574)	5/14/2003 1:01:06 PM
From: Don Lloyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

John, It is possible to increase the rate at which shareholders divide the wealth faster than the wealth being divided is growing. In which case, those who hold the wealth in the first place are being made poorer. That's the purpose of proper accounting. The value of a company and the change in that value, and how that value is distributed amongst its shareholders are separate questions. I claim that the very word 'expense' must have an application to the value of the company proper, and its profitability, and it should be just as applicable to a private company as to a public one. If a one man company in the tax free underground economy makes widgets and pays a secretary $25K per year, wouldn't he be able to increase his company's profits (revenues minus expenses) by $25K by marrying his secretary and eliminating the salary expense? Would this not be a real competitive advantage over another widget maker that still had a real salary to pay? Regards, Don

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (174574)	5/20/2003 9:39:51 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi John, RE: "No. What gives you this idea?" From an old post on CSCO where you talked about I believe putting a boot into an employee - this comment arose around a discussion about options. I didn't reply because the post appeared to convey a philosophical difference in business attitude. You seemed to favor the boot approach rather than the carrot approach. You also seemed to convey in this old post a lack of valuing the importance of maximizing growth by distributing ownership as a means to leverage more people so more are growing more faster. RE: use vs accounting They're related. You perceive they aren't, but I perceive they are. In fact, one of the reasons why options aren't expensed is because some political body (forgot which one, Congress?) originally wanted to see ownership grow to become a competitive advantage for the USA, over foreign companies in foreign countries, which is the case at the moment. Regards, Amy J