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 : Citrix Systems (CTXS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (5343)	3/24/1998 11:04:00 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9068

>>I have no problem with including on-going license fees, but the MSFT $75 million payment was one time payment for exclusive purchase of an asset that can not be sold again, thus should not be included in quarterly earnings on a pro-rated basis.<< Roger - I tend to agree with this statement. The issue is not whether the Microsoft payments "should" be included in quarterly earnings from an accounting standpoint, but whether doing so has created an articifial bubble in the earnings growth. Time will answer that question, I suppose. But from what I remember about the Microsoft agreement, the 75 mil was just the beginning, and that some additional fees would be forthcoming in the future. I know I'm just being lazy not looking it up right now, but that's my recollection. - Allen

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (5343)	3/24/1998 11:32:00 AM
From: dougjn	Respond to of 9068

One time payment, but earned over the life of the license, even though the $75 million minimum payment part of the license is flat, rather than tied to amount of sales. Your logic would suggest that all purchases of capital equipment should be expensed immediately, when they are purchased, rather than depreciated over some approximation of their useful life. Doug