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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (65446)	5/13/2004 10:30:45 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

"House panel passes bill to block stock-option expensing " why am I not surprised? I believe the method of accounting for them that was proposed is wrong, but I would like to see an end to transferring shareholder wealth to insiders by option smoke and mirrors. I still think if everyone showed up at conference calls and asked the CEO and CFO this simple question "If you did not have to buy back shares to prevent dilution by options, what dividend per share could you have paid shareholders with that cash?" that it would shine a light on the transfer of wealth. I used to be against option expensing. I think it was because I thought I might like to go back to high tech and I wanted my share of the pie.... but now that I seem happy writing my investment newsletter and managing my money while doing a bit of consulting, I am against my wealth being transfered to insiders. Funny how this perspective changes. FWIW, a friend got a job offer at Agilent and he was not offered options. They seem to be back to their conservative accounting ways... which means only a few top insiders and the managers get the options cream I think. Kirk

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (65446)	5/13/2004 11:03:08 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

I've thought all along that the black scholes model on the table is not acceptable as a way to expense options and was an easy target to shoot down. Had they compromised with an acceptable options expensing method that avoids expensing at grant and a volitility multiple, maybe something might have gone through.