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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Tech Stock Options -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patrick Slevin who wrote (27709)	11/2/1997 11:11:00 PM
From: j g cordes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58727

Sorry you got wet, it was pretty wild as the front made its way through here also... I understand your points Patrick, and some are well taken. Regarding your knowing ceos is immaterial, as we've all brushed shoulders with Fortune 500 starlets from time to time. If I were to make a list of those who I'd like to get to know before leaving this mortal coil, it would include only a few of the captains of industry. Please elaborate on this point you make.. "My point is....these companies have buyback programs in place and this is one way the program is facilitated. Thru stock buybacks a company reduces the number of outstanding shares making each remaining share more valuable. This is a form of growth." There's a potential (but not guaranteed) price appreciation from reducing the gross share divisability of earnings, but certainly there's no growth.

To: Patrick Slevin who wrote (27709)	11/3/1997 3:50:00 AM
From: Fred Weiss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58727

My point is....these companies have buyback programs in place and this is one way the program is facilitated. Thru stock buybacks a company reduces the number of outstanding shares making each remaining share more valuable. If that's what they do with the stock, Pat, retire it, then I would agree. If, on the other hand, they issue stock options to some exec who then puts it back into the marketplace, then they are operating with an unfair advantage without reducing liquidity. I would also point out that the most common practice is to sell puts and put the money into their bank account without any effect on liquidity except to take from some less knowledgable individual who isn't as privy to their day to day performance or future outlook. I personally see very little difference between stocks and options in this instance, except that it places a legal temptation in front of every board of directors or CFO to profit from inside knowledge or, in fact, to juggle figures at earnings time. Trader Spud