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: TimF who wrote (178420)	6/27/2004 12:13:51 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

twfowler This isn't just one discussion. There are several points that have been debated. Some people thought the options grants were giveaway and the cost of the shares was $0. Others thought the shares were newly issued and caused dilution. The posting you linked to discussed aspects that don't apply here anymore. Then there's the question of does it make sense to expense the options cost (is there a cost?) at the time of grant or exercise? I don't have the answers. I was addressing: The options are not the right to get free shares at no cost. The options do not cause dilution because Intel is repurchasing more shares than exercised by grant holders. It is reasonable to consider the shares delivered upon options exercise to be the same shares that were repurchased at the time of the original grant, at or near the grant price. It is reasonable to consider the shares repurchased today to be the shares that will eventually be delivered upon exercise of today's grants, at or near today's grant price. It is not necessary to consider the shares repurchased today to be the shares delivered today upon exercise of old grants. The difference in value between the repurchase price and the share price on the day of exercise is "opportunity loss". How this all gets resolved is beyond me. I only wanted to dispel the notion that Intel's board of directors is no different from Enron's. That was a cheap shot by Carl and Ali.