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 : IATV-ACTV Digital Convergence Software-HyperTV -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: art slott who wrote (3611)	5/15/1999 9:07:00 AM
From: Jeff Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13157

"I'm sure he hasn't been paid yet. And i'm sure he would defer it if need be" Well now there's a thought. Why wasn't it deferred to start with? The thing that bothers me is the timing of this reward program for IATV's officers. If the officers are convinced that they and this company will achieve great things in the next 1 - 2 years then why didn't they wait until the great things had been accomplished? Running with ankle weights was a great analogy Mike F., and rewarding Samuels for stock dilution sounds like the fox guarding the chickens. Feeling a little plucked, Jeff

To: art slott who wrote (3611)	5/15/1999 4:54:00 PM
From: Mike Fredericks	Respond to of 13157

I wrote: Samuels et al already got their $3.4 mill in cash. With traditional stock options, since people tend to hold them until they exercise, they get penalized if the stock tanks... not so in this case. You responded: How do you know that? I'm sure he hasn't been paid yet. And i'm sure he would defer it if need be. My response to your question comes from the earnings report: Revenues for the three months ended March 31, 1999 were $400,794, compared to revenues of $361,247 for the three months ended March 31, 1998. All 1999 revenues and the majority of 1998 revenues derived from sales of HyperTV(TM), the Company's TV-Internet convergence product. The Company had a loss applicable to common shareholders of $7,380,471, or $.23 per share, in the more recent quarter, compared with a loss applicable to common shareholders of $2,772,137, or $.17 per share, for the quarter ended March 31, 1998. Approximately $3.4 million, or over 46 % of the net loss for the 1999 quarter, was the result of a non-cash charge for stock appreciation rights expense, due to a significant increase in the market price of the Company's common stock during the quarter. So, I misread it. I assumed that since the company already took the charge against earnings (a whopping $3.4 million, almost 9 times revenues for the same quarter), that it had already been paid out. I will admit also that I do not know how accounting works, so I don't know whether they are allowed to take the charge against earnings now and pay out the bonus later. I do think it's obscene that the execs get paid 9 times REVENUES for a quarter, but in your post you weren't debating me on that one. But like I said, I will admit that I do not have any evidence that says that the payment was actually made, only that they "paid for it" (figure of speech) last quarter by taking the charge on the books. -Fred