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.
Technology Stocks : S3 (A LONGER TERM PERSPECTIVE) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Don Earl who wrote (12724)2/12/1999 11:55:00 AM
From: mark doubiago  Respond to of 14577
 
A couple of years back we had a lot of discussions, pro and con about the company buying back stock to cut their outstanding issues. I have tended to waiver on this issue. It would be great if there were only about 25 million shares instead of 54 million or the soon to be 60 to ??? million. But on the other hand if they will use those extra shares for a good purpose like a great acquisition, then fine, go ahead. I don't like the idea of highly paid heads of companies getting options for pennies, at least not while the stock is going down into the dumpster. They should make the availability of options tied to stock performance. The stock does good, you get options, or the price is lower. The stock does bad, you don't get options or they are higher priced. I think incentives are a great thing, but they seem to have been absent at S3 for the last few years with their ability to reprice them down when the stock drops. What is the incentive to excel when you know that you can reprice the options if the company fails and the stock drops? I am not saying that they didn't care about the company and knew they could just reprice the options. I think there were several miscues on execution and it would have been nice if the powers to be would have suffered with all of us shareholders who lost our shirts instead of being able to still get options and/or reprice them down.