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 : The New QUALCOMM - Coming Into Buy Range -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thinkclear who wrote (1035)	8/21/2007 10:55:20 AM
From: manalagi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9129

I might have just do that. I do not see any appreciation of the stock in the near future. If I were a savvy investor like carranza, I would have liquidated all (not just part) of my holdings when Paul Jacobs sold at 45. Having a cost basis at $ 8 and keep holding when the stock is behaving like a falling knife is foolish. The current management does not seem to care except for thier own pocket. Morale is very low since all the stock purchase plan is below what they paid, even with a 15% discount, and employee's stock options are worthless. How can you innovate when your mind is being bothered by financial erosion? Management has to do something, at least stock buy back. The silence is deafening. We know now that Paul Jacob is not ready (if ever) for prime time.

To: thinkclear who wrote (1035)	8/21/2007 10:57:22 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9129

I have no problem with your calculation. It all depends on how Paul views his cost basis. If he has reduced it to a negative thanks to options, then it is crazy to get rid of the shares. I am not enough of an accountant to make an informed comment on whether Paul is justified in considering that options have reduced his cost basis. I can see reasons why one would justifiably think so and I can see reasons why one is not. My gut tells me that the options should not be considered as reducing the cost basis unless he used them to actually buy shares, in which case the negative cost basis is likely non-existent. Still, there is a lot of merit to thinking of Paul's trading in Q as being part of a whole, i.e., a total investment of X dollars in shares and options has resulted in Paul holding Y number of shares which cost a total of $Z and yield .56 a year.