SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (43208)1/13/1999 1:42:00 PM
From: Mike M2  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 132070
 
Nadine, I'm not an accountant nor a lawyer so I will leave the issues of legality and GAAP compliance to the experts but I will say such practices are misleading to investors especially employee stock options accounting for the full story see Forbes mid -may 98 article anyone have the url handy for Nadine? In a nut shell the costs of employees stock options do not show up as an expense on the income statement instead they reduce shareholders equity and to the extent this is done the true earnings of a company are overstated because the employee compensation cost is understated. Currently this practice is in compliance with GAAP and legal but it is misleading. BTW look at the footnotes of the financial stmts in the 10k to see the impact of this practices. Mike



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (43208)1/13/1999 5:30:00 PM
From: Knighty Tin  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 132070
 
Nadine, Since neither the legal methods of scamming eps or the illegal methods have any bearing on real eps, they can look alike and it can be confusing. The only difference is that some of the stuff pushes the limits of ethical accounting while the other is against the law. There is a difference between law and justice. MSFT is accused of breaking the actual law in this case.

MB