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: GVTucker who wrote (67236)	3/7/2005 2:21:55 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 77400

Chambers and Barrett's position is disningenuous. All these big tech CEOs are disingenuous about everything, options is only one area. Barrett bitches to hell and back about California taxes, while conveniently ignoring the fact that the freeze on california property taxes that occurred in 78 (which also applied to CORPORATIONs) allowed intel to reap an incredible real estate windfall and pay essentially no CA taxes for any of their mature bldgs for 20 years - a loophole he would have received from no other state. And Chambers is all over the issue of why Americans won't go to engineering school, meanwhile Cisco is offshoring the hell out of their engineering staff. You'd have to be an idiot to go to engineering school now. I'm tired of these guys. Google and Yahoo execs are still ok with me, for now.

To: GVTucker who wrote (67236)	3/8/2005 2:24:20 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

GV, it's been several years since I looked at this so my post wasn't accurate, but recall concluding a long time ago if you do it your way the problem is there's a double counting. This is where you and I see it differently. But we agreed it would be a concern if the global perceptions around the USA stock market were bad. Haven't heard investors overseas complain about stock options like we do here, which isn't to invalidate the concern. Shannon's post about shifting piles of money is true, but historically bonuses and "other gifts" historically have been where the most hidden absues are, which is why I've always felt options is the best of all piles for enforcing gains to be aligned with shareholders and still do. Sure, I do believe a few small tweeks could prevent incongruencies with options that get created by bubbles, for example, by having a rule that says the option gain gets voided if the company goes down the tank. Put a portion of the executives portion of the gains in escrow and yank it back if the stock tumbles after a bubble. Alternatively, require an exec to hold onto 25% of their options, or something similar to minimize incongruencies. But if we go back to the old day model of "other gifts", we're asking for hidden piles of money. At least with options, it's more visible. Regards, Amy J