Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Regardless of your "you can twist that B.S. you're spouting", at least you seem to agree with me, that the owners are the risk takers, not the employees (except when they are in their role as shareholders). Who are you laboring for, the owners, or your fellow employees? If Intel's goal is just to enrich the employees, why would anyone invest their capital, employees included? It's that type of thinking that lead to the Enron and Worldcom debacles.
---Right, ya know I own shares in McDonalds, I just found out that McDonalds employees get discounts on food, so according to your logic, since I support McDonalds, I should get those same discounts on food too, or we should string up McDonalds management for giving away the food profits.
I also own shares in Sears, and I just found out that Sears employees get 10-15% discounts on merchandise, so according to your logic, since I'm taking a risk in Sears, I should get those discounts too, or we should string up Sears Management for giving away the merchandise profits.
And let's not forget that I was a member of the military, and shopped in the Navy Exchange, where military people get discounts, and pay no sales tax, so acording to your logic, since my taxes now support the military, I should also now be able to shop there and get those discounts and no sales taxes too, or we should string up President Bush for giving away my tax money.
Rediculous..... Just like your statements. Employees in all businesses have always gotten bennies that are not available to those that don't work for the company. I bet you get some from your company yourself. Can I have some of those same benefits too??
I wonder how IR and the BOD would feel about that. I've held Intel stock for about 10 years, not so that I can "bitch and whine", but because I have great respect for the company. I happen to think that the current management isn't doing nearly the job that the old management did. Does Intel want long term, loyal shareholders, or do they want the company to be owner by traders? Ask the folks in IR, I think they will tell you they want the former.
---As long as people buy the stock, long term, short term, who cares? And I didn't see IR and BOD call for an ouster of management when the repriced the options, so I don't think that you speak for them either.
Your post has gone a way towards convincing me that I should sell my Intel stock. Even though I hoped to pass it on to my heirs. Sometimes shareholders "bitch and whine" and "twist that BS they are sprouting" because they sincerely care about the company. Maybe as much, or more, than some employees.
John
---Boy, if you let someone's post on a board make you go "a long way towards convincing you that you should sell your stock", then you're in a sorrier shape than I thought. I use to have respect for your opinions, when you were thinking with your head, instead of your emotions, but I guess I should thank you for showing me how foolish that respect was. I won't make that mistake again.
Semi
Man, you must hate it when someone says somthing critical of your clique.
Man, you must hate it when someone says something logical that stomps on your emotional reponses.
Semi
Message to share holders: Managment will give away the profits as they see fit, if you don't like it, screw...
Message to Crybabies..... Feel free to take sour grapes elsewhere....
Semi
The stockholders are the risk takers. They may not "bust their arse" working for the company, but chances are they busted their arse working for the money they are investing in the company. They provide the capital that makes Intel function, and that pays the salary of the employees. Employees don't have downside risk, owners have constant downside risk, as anyone that bought between $20 and $75 understands.
-- That still does not entitle them to a repricing of their stock. That is a benefit for the employees that work for the company and put effort into it, not for people who could have taken their money and invested it elsewhere. The money they used to buy that stock was not given to them by intel in exchange for effort put into the company, and you can twist that B.S. you're spouting any way you want, it doesn't change that basic fact.
I'm neutral on expensing options; both sides have great arguments. I do believe that you compensate performance, and recently Intel has increased option grants as their performance has decreased. As an owner/risk taker I take that as a sign that Intel cares more about the employees than the owners. So I reduced my risk. When many of the other owners reduce their holding, those employee options are worthless. Like it or not, it all comes back to the owners. Without them, Intel is nothing.
John
---Many employees ARE Owners through the companies stock purchase plan. They did not get that stock repriced either, so it all basically boils down to a basic fact. If you don't like the way the company is being run, then sell your stock, and go buy something that you are more pleased with. That's the way it works. I don't think that you or dlr_972 speak for the majority of intel stockholders, and nobody is forcing you to buy or hold intel stock. But holding on to intel just so you and dlr_972 can bitch and whine about the way things are being run, is a bunch of B.S. Don't like it, get out. Simple.
Semi
bottom line on options- they are only whorth what the lousy stock holders will pay. and the employees whose jobs are so superior to the rest of world's jobs will get all the options the want. however usless they are. keep the price down and all you'll get is paper roses.
you guys are some heavy thinkers. :)
I didn't say that intel jobs were superior to other jobs, and that's not what you were whining about. You were whining because a stockholder doesn't get the same treatment that an stockholder/employee gets, and stock bought on the open market doesn't get the same treatment as options, You shouldn't get the same treatment, and open market purchased stock shouldn't be treated the same as options.
Frankly, I don't believe that anyone elected you as representative to speak for the "Lousy Stockholders" as you call them, and at least I can do some thinking, instead of whining that everyone doesn't get the same equal treatment for NOT giving the same effort back to the company. Sorry Comrade, wrong country.
Semi
whatever; the employee had second set of options given that were in the money because the original was out of the money. Is that a re-price or a re-float? It something they didn't offer the rest of the stock holders :(
And the rest of the stockholders don't bust their arse working for the company like the employees do either. They just simply get to sit back and whine that they didn't get the same thing as those that did bust their arse :(
Semi
AUSTIN, Texas -- Intel Corp. dropped a bomb on the lithography industry, informing its suppliers that it has removed the 157-nanometer lithography generation from its road map. Peter Silverman, director of lithography capital equipment, said Intel will extend the 193-nm tools for the 45-nm node coming into production in 2007, where 157-nm tools were expected to play a role.
It's been a really long time (>5 years) since I "Did Any Litho", but this is the first time I've heard of intel moving away from the 157nm tools. I still know some people in the "Litho Circle", a friend of mine use to work for SVGL before it was a subsidiary of ASML. I even visited their Manufacturing facilities in Connecticut a few years back. Ahhhhh those were the days.....
Everyone has been really tight lipped about anything sub 90nm process, but I had heard that there were "Significant Lens Issues" with the tools. Maybe the Calcium Floride issue is what they were talking about.
As far as intel is concerned, I recall that there was speculation that intel used quite a bit of Phase Shifting when they were trying to extend CuMine at the end of it's life, so they should have quite a bit of experience doing that. The costs of Phase Shifting may be higher, due to having to expose the die twice, which also cuts the throughput, as well as the higher costs of the Masks, but I believe that I read somewhere (Can't find It) that intel makes their own masks, so they should have quite a bit of past experience with that too, and I would guess that making the Masks themselves would reduce the costs. I haven't seen too much that you can do about the throughput issue this early in the tool development, except Buy More Tools. I haven't seen throughput numbers on the next generation steppers.
My guess is, intel probably had a couple of the steppers installed somewhere, and either the Critical Dimensions weren't meeting expectations, or the Sustaining costs of achieving those CD's were too far outside the financial and/or throughput parameters.
JMO
Semi
I guess I need to back up. First, I have wrongly assumed you were an Intel employee and I apologize. You just seem to know so much about it.
As to the data that I conveniently omitted - what data would that be?
-Moorea
The data that the option program was expanded to include hourly employees in 1997. You said you didn't see a reason for the percentage to be higher after 1997. I showed you a reason.
And someone doesn't have to be an employee to know allot about intel. It's called doing the research. I purchased my first shares in 1983, and I still have them. I research all my investments thoroughly before I put down my money. As a matter of fact, I'm anal about it. That's how I know.
Water Under the Bridge IMO. Let's start over. Hi, I'm SemiconEng. Welcome to the board
Semi
That said, those days are over and a return to "normal" grant rates should ensue. "Normal" is 1-1.5% in my opinion.
I believe I understand the employee shareholder perspective as well. To put it bluntly, I would want as many options granted to me as possible at the lowest exercise price possible and I want the stock price to be at an all time high the day they vest. After exercise and sale, I'd want the stock price to plummet so I could get my next batch of options granted at a low exercise price. Lather, rinse, repeat. Do I have this correct?
I am fully cognizant that any discussion with an Intel employee about reducing the stock option grant percent is not going to be viewed in a positive light. Please try to see it from a non-employee shareholder perspective as well. Thanks.
-Moorea
I simply answered your question with a piece of data that you conveniently omitted. Of course, your data also does not take into account the increase in the number of employees during that period, which would also account for the increase in percentage. Your omission appeared to suggest that there wasn't a reason for the increase. I showed you one. Your "opinion" on what the rates should have been pre and post the granting of options to hourly employees is duly noted...... As your opinion.
BTW, I never said I was an intel employee. Unless you are attempting to join the "Are you an intel employee" Witch Hunt that seems to be a favorite pastime of certain people on these board, then I would appreciate it if you would refrain from speculation, or putting words into my mouth. As far as that topic goes, I would also appreciate it if you would MYOB. Thanks.
Semi
My question was: what is the rationale for Intel to feel the need to raise its option grants from 1-1.5%/yr to 2%/yr? That's a 33% - 100% increase in potential dilution to existing shareholders!
---Here is the answer to your question. Adding hourly employees to the stock option program beginning in 1997 would increase the percentage of options granted......
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1034742
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1034867
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/CN021197.HTM
New Across-The-Board Stock Program Begins in 1997
SANTA CLARA, CA, February 11, 1997 - All employees at Intel Corporation are now eligible for stock options - just the latest positive news in a record-breaking year for Intel and its employees.
Semi
So, I wonder if you know, that up until a few years ago, intel did not grant stock options to hourly non-exempt employees, only to salaried exempts. I'm not sure of the exact year that hourly employees started getting them also, but I believe the 1997-2003 time frame fits. ask that question? I would guess that the number of hourly wage employees far out weighs the number of salaried employees, and could account for the extra percentage. Is it possible this is the reason for the higer percentage? Was that fact presented, or did anybody
Semi
---And as a matter of fact, I just found the announcement. It was EXACTLY 1997 when intel added hourly employees to the stock option granting program, so an increase in the percentage of options would have been normal after 1997.
---I Bet You Didn't Know That........ Did You.
Semi
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/CN021197.HTM
New Across-The-Board Stock Program Begins in 1997
SANTA CLARA, CA, February 11, 1997 - All employees at Intel Corporation are now eligible for stock options - just the latest positive news in a record-breaking year for Intel and its employees.
My concern as expressed at the annual meeting is that Intel has historically issued stock option grants to the management and employees in the range of 1-1.5% annually. This has been sufficient to attract, retain, & motivate both management and the rank & file employees over many years and IMHO Intel's performance has been quite good.
Unless there is some competitive reason, such as what happened during the internet boom years, I believe there is no need to ratchet up the grant rate beyond 1.5% If you're at AMD or Transmeta you probably need to shower the employees with option grants just to retain & motivate them. I find the case for "showering" option grants way less compelling at the 800 lb gorilla named Intel.
So, I wonder if you know, that up until a few years ago, intel did not grant stock options to hourly non-exempt employees, only to salaried exempts. I'm not sure of the exact year that hourly employees started getting them also, but I believe the 1997-2003 time frame fits. ask that question? I would guess that the number of hourly wage employees far out weighs the number of salaried employees, and could account for the extra percentage. Is it possible this is the reason for the higer percentage? Was that fact presented, or did anybody
Semi
Intel starts shipping first portability processors - mobile Pentium 4s
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/05/20&pages=01&seq=1
Intel recently started shipping its first portability processors - mobile Pentium 4s - and expects to see large shipments of the processors in June, according to local notebook makers.
Unlike the Pentium 4-M designed for thin-and-light notebooks, or desktop-use Pentium 4s, the mobile Pentium 4 is dedicated to mobile PCs, or transportable notebooks as Intel calls them. Currently, Intel offers mobile Pentium 4 processors at speeds of 3.06, 2.8, 2.66 and 2.4GHz. The processors are built using a 0.13-micron process and use a 533MHz FSB (front-side bus), but do not offer Intel's Hyper-Threading technology, the companies said.
Semi, I don't know if you've seen this page, but it gets updated occasionally with new Itanium 2 design wins.
http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/testimonials/index.html
The list is large and growing, and these are just a fraction of HP's customers.
wbmw
Cool, I didn't know that was there. Thanks for the link
Semi
I think you all need to take a chill pill. *Any* published material is protected under copyright law, whether reproduced in whole or in part. Fundamentally, it is no less "wrong" to reproduce a choice few sentences than it is to cut and paste the entire article. In general most free sites don't care either way - it gives them free exposure - and as such, they choose not to enforce or prosecute copyright violations. It would be nearly impossible to prosecute anyway. Nonetheless, it is illegal to copy someone else's work, in whole or in part, without their permission. It is no less illegal if you only copy part of it.
--- Maybe so, but I don't agree with your "Don't care either way" statement. Posting part of the article makes the person go to the original site to read the full article, and therefore be exposed to the original sites advertising. Reading the whole article here, instead of at the inquirer, means that Mike doesn't get you to see HIS sites advertising. There's a big difference. Besides, Mike Magee also doesn't seem to agree with you, and since the referenced article belongs to his site, I think I'll take his opinion over yours, no offense.
Semi
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=17720736
To:Joseph Pareti who wrote (167820)
From: Mike Magee Thursday, Jul 11, 2002 3:31 AM
Respond to of 174659
Try posting just a part of the story rather than breaching my copyright in full next time, you strange person.
chipguy, oh please! What crawled up your xxx?
We've been doing it for years, it can be seen as free advertising as well, as long as you include the link.
---Ummmm, Take a chill pill. I believe the point that Chipguy was making, is that a cut/paste of an ENTIRE article, without permission of the author, could be viewed as a violation of
copyright law, and can subject the person doing it, to legal action.
Inquirer Terms Of Use
http://www.theinquirer.net/?page=17
You agree NOT to:
Use your access to The Inquirer for any commercial purpose.
Republish information found in the site without first obtaining written permission from The Inquirer.
Semi
Sharp Shows Off New PDAs
Arik Hesseldahl, 05.19.03, 10:00 AM ET
http://www.forbes.com/2003/05/19/cx_ah_0519tentech.html?partner=yahoo&referrer=
Japan's Sharp has been offering a line of PDAs that doesn't run on one of the dominant operating systems typical of handheld devices. There's no Palm (nasdaq: PALM - news - people ) OS nor Microsoft Pocket PC nor Symbian OS. Instead, the Zaurus devices run Linux--which has made them popular among devotees of that platform.
The company has released two new models in Japan that look like tiny laptops. They are the SL-C760 and the SL-C750. And if the typical pattern holds--if they're successful in Japan--they may be released elsewhere.
Both have 3.7-inch LCD screens and small QWERTY keyboards suitable for typing with thumbs. Both have Intel (nasdaq: INTC - news - people )-made XScale processors running at 400 MHz.
The Chrysler Group Adopts Intel Itanium 2-Based System Cluster From HP and MSC.Software
New Solution to Help Improve Noise, Vibration, Harshness Testing
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030519/195231_1.html
SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 19, 2003--Intel Corporation, HP (NYSE:HPQ - News) and MSC.Software (NYSE:MNS - News) today announced that the Chrysler Group, a unit of DaimlerChrysler, has migrated part of its High Performance Computing (HPC) center to Intel® Itanium® 2 processor-based HP Workstation zx6000 with HP-UX in a rack configuration running MSC.Software's Virtual Product Development applications.
What newspaper is that? Laptop computers are kind of upscale items and your paper's readership demographics may not make it first choice in your area. Does it have a lot of ads for paternity test clinics, check cashing, and credit repair doctors?
I'm thinking that no doubt, according to Petz, Paternity Test Clinics, Check Casing Businesses and Credit Repair Doctors are not pulling their weight.
Semi
I was referring to my Sunday newspaper ads --> 0 Centrinos offered. You can find anything on the internet.
Petz
No problem. Glad you cleared that up, about it only being in your local Sunday paper, in your local area, which of course represents a very small biased point of view, and says nothing about Centrino's Ability to pull it's weight. Maybe next time you might want to specify what you mean up front, then maybe people won't get the wrong idea that you were speaking in general terms about Centrino's ability to Pull it's weight, when really, you were basing your opinion on sales ads in 1 Sunday Paper, in 1 Specific area of the country, which really tells people nothing about Centrino's ability to pull it's weight.
I mean, you wouldn't want people to accuse you of spreading B.S. and FUD........ Would you?
Semi
RE:I don't think Centrino is pulling its weight considering the megabucks of marketing thrown at it. Its clear that that only thing consumers will pay top $ for is performance, not battery life. Again, not a single Centrino notebook in CompUSA, Circuit City or Best Buy.
Petz
--- You're right, there isn't a single notebook, there are multiple.
Centrino Notebooks At CompUSA - 4 Models
http://www.compusa.com/promos/centrino/default.asp
Centrino Notebook At Circuit City - 1 Model
http://www.circuitcity.com/verity_search.jsp?productType=1&search=CENTRINO&qp=0&c=1&....
Centrino Notebooks at Best Buy - 3 Models
http://www.bestbuy.com/IntelStore/Centrino.asp
Centrino Manufacturers (15) And Major Retailers (7):
http://www.intel.com/buy/mobiletechnology/
Semi
Fingolfen, there have been other reviews as well.
*** Temporary Driod Mode = On ***
---Obviously, Tom's Hardware Guide has been Bought off, Strong Arm'd, and Hoodwinked by intel. I wrote them an e-mail, and I am NEVER going to read, or support that site again, ever, in my lifetime. So There......
http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/athlonxp-3200/index.x?pg=12
Next, I hate to say it,........
---Obviously, Tech Report has been Bought Off, Strong Arm'd, and Hoodwinked by intel. I wrote them an e-mail, and I am NEVER going to read or support that site again, ever, in my lifetime. So There......
http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3998,a=41551,00.asp
If anything illustrates the flaws in AMD's processor naming scheme, it's the 3200+.
---Obviously, Extreme Tech has been Bought Off, Strong Arm'd, and Hoodwinked by intel. I wrote them an e-mail, and I am NEVER going to read or support that site again, ever, in my lifetime. So There......
*** Temporary Driod Mode = Off ***
Semi
If you have saved the company millions then you lost your investment when the stock (if Intel) went from $75 to what $13. I would rather see you paid then.
And why do I have to pay your salary (nothing personal)? But shouldn't the company you helped pay you and not require the stockholders to pick up the tab?
---What investment? I lost nothing on my options, for I paid nothing for them to begin with. Paper gains? Sure, but I made no investment in my options. As far as my salary, I got that regardless. Options weren't guaranteed as part of my compensation package that I accepted, I accepted a base salary, Medical, Dental, Life Insurance. I completely understood that Options were not guaranteed, but.... Optional (pun intended).
Yes I received options the same way, but the company's stock always increased until the last years. Now, I have changed my mind about employee options since the stocks have performed so badly over the last few years.
---Ah, now the truth comes out. As long as you were raking in the loot on paper, you thought Options were great, now that you're not, suddenly they stink. I'll bet you're a fair weather Sports fan, and a bandwagon jumper too. Don't expect me to respect that point of view, I don't.
I feel high tech is no longer high growth (I hope I'm wrong), and will eventually be a commodity like the products Coke and GE sell. And even though it takes a lot of talent to produce the products the stock is unable to grow to pay the salaries of the employees. Which by definition will take the value away from options anyway. Which by the way were you aware that all employees don't get the same grant price? Some are much lower than others.
---Yes I was aware of that. I'm a Process Engineer, I have responsibility for my multi million dollar toolset. Some Manufacturing Technician who pushes buttons on the Fab floor, punches a clock and goes home, Shouldn't get the same grant price as me, and I shouldn't get the same grant price as the Fab Manager, responsible for everything that happens in the Fab. Having that kind of equality is called socialism. No Thank You.
I'm not in favor of taking anything away from the employees. And I would hate to see the rank and file lose out on the growth of the company, But I'm not sure about options being what they used to be especially for a maturing industry.
---That doesn't surprise me a bit. Don't give me that B.S. about not wanting to take anything away from the employees, that's exactly what you're proposing. Do you think you're going to get bigger raises if Options are taken away? Don't hold your breath. Is the Option system perfect, probably not. But I've found in my experience that if something doesn't work quite the way that it use to, and your not satisfied with it, then you first try to fix it. Throwing your problems away, is the easy way out, and in my experience, that "solution", has consistently led to failure.
Semi
Do employee options create ownership or just traders?
My issue with stock options today is the use of salary versus having ownership in the company. Used to be that options were given to create ownership by the employees, therefore having a long-term interest in the success and welfare of the company. Now days seems most employees are sellers verses holders, they claim the need to diversify. Which makes the options granted just money- no longer ownership in the company.
As a matter of reasoning, if the employees sell their options high then get the new grants at a lower price; they probably don't care about the long-term price of the stock. They are similar to trader's verses investors.
---Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it doesn't sound like you understand the concept of "Vesting". Did you know, that when a Stock Option is Granted, you can't "Sell It" immediately? As a matter of fact, you can't even buy it and hold it immediately. There is a certain amount of time, that a person has to wait before that stock grant is eligible to be bought (Vested).
---For example, I'm looking at my stock option printout right now. the options that I got awarded in March of 2001, just vested in March of 2003. I couldn't actually buy the stock (and hold or sell) until March of 2003, and even then, if I don't "Exercise The Option" by March of 2011, the grant expires..... worthless. So I am definitely interested in the long term value and appreciation or depreciation of the stock.
---The second factor that comes into play, is "Stock Splits". At my company, If the stock splits, the number of options "On the Books" (Vested or not, but not exercised) Doubles, and the "Grant Price" (the price I have to pay to exercise) of each grouping of Stock Grants is cut in half.
---So to use the same example, "let's say" (hypothetically) that I was awarded 25 shares of those same options previously mentioned, and that the "Grant Price" was $25.68 (underwater at this point by the way). IF..... IF, by March of 2011, my Company's stock splits 2 for 1, Those Options would now be 50 shares, and the "Grant Price" would be cut in half, ie: $12.84. My "exercise" cost for EACH share of the new total of 50 shares. So, I would CERTAINLY have an interest in having the long term value of the stock increase. Assuming all that increase happened before 2011. If it didn't split, I would still have my original 25 shares @ $25.68. Hopefully, the stock will be higher than that before March of 2011. Otherwise, again.... Worthless.
I'm for employee ownership but I see too much insider selling at the highs therefore driving down the price for investor. Investors are at the disadvantage of the insiders. The insiders are no longer the same group that founded the company, so just give us the labor cost the investors have to pay to get the job done and work to protect the long-term value of the stock.
---Again, I have to disagree. I'm not "The same group that founded the company", but over the last decade, my contributions have saved the company millions of dollars, and resulted in so many improvements to productivity and cost savings, that I stopped counting long ago. Regardless of whether I was there in the beginning or not, I believe my contributions to the company, past, present, and in the future, means that I DESERVE those Options, for the work I've done in the past, and presumably the work I'll do in the future, even though "Outsiders" (Like Carl) have no clue of all the things that I've done to Earn Them.
Semi
Amy On SI.....
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=18928450
Ha, How did you know I was still (rarely) reading SI? Are you Psychic??
Thanks.....
Semi
K- stood for Kryptonite.
Sanders coined this term because Krytonite was the Superman killer. Superman was of course Intel, and thus this was a left handed compliment for Intel.
Sanders never completed the Superman tale, when asked who was the Lex Luthor in his story.
Obvious isn't it?? Lex has tried to use Kryptonite on Superman on several occasions, and although it initially appears to hurt Superman, Ole Lex always ends up getting his butt kicked.
Semi
Who says Inquirer only brings out the bad on Intel?
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9389
Once in a lifetime doesn't count.
Semi
LOL. I won't dignify your comments with any further response.
Of course you won't. It's tough to respond with your foot in your mouth. My advice...... The next time you make provocative statements, don't act surprised when you provoke somebody.
Semi
The top people will get their pie one way or another -if not with options then with larger awards of restricted stock (which is a better solution than options, IMHO).
That's not the point. The point is that "some person" automatically implied (supposed) that based on what intel management has been accused of doing, that other intel employees are a bunch of greedy people, who would rather keep their own options then to demonstrate some personal integrity and send a message to management. That tells me something about that person.
Semi
Since many companies have stated publicly that expensing of options will lead to fewer options being issued in the future, it is reasonable to suppose that holders of INTC options -and those in line to receive them in the future-- might be reluctant to endorse option expensing. Regards, Dew
Maybe you "suppose"...... wrong. Of course, you have neglected to "suppose" the possibility that an intel employee might be willing to sacrifice some future stock options, just to make sure that the Company Officers don't continue to take such a large chunk of the pie..... But I guess that possibility never occurred to you.
Did it.
Semi
The survey results might be more revealing if those on the message board who are Intel employees refrained from voting.
Actually, it might be even more revealing if they did. It seems by your implication that you are certain how a person who might be an intel employee would vote. All hail...... Drew's Crystal Ball.
Semi
It's happening, but CIOs remain worried about the security of wireless corporate LANs.
When wireless corporate LANs become widespread, we may see a spike in the number of lawyers who specialize in suits pertaining to the theft of trade secrets.
True, maybe that's why my company doesn't do it. You should see the firewalls that I have to leap over in order to get into the wired network now. I'm guessing the Information Security people are having a bit of heartburn over wireless. I'm sure that since there does seem to be a "Wireless Security Issue" vacuum, there will be solutions providers leaping in shortly. Are there any Wireless Encryption Products currently available that you know of?? I can't recall seeing any myself.....
Semi
wbmw,
You are back to gibberish.
BTW, are you trying to spam this board out of existence?
Joe
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=966125
Elmer,
I have no problem with different standards. Not for AMD and Intel investors, but for posters and hecklers.
Joe
Practice what you preach.
RE:Could PDA's have been some sort of Fad, that has peaked???
I don't think so, I think they just got caught in the tech
spending downdraft. I think the killer apps. for both
PDA's and Tablet P.C.s are handwritting recongnition and
WiFi. The ability of PDAs and tablet P.C. to recognise even
my handwritting is remarkable. I work in the medical profession
almost all lab results are availble on a compter terminal on
each floor the problem is there are usaully at least 3-4 people
waiting in line to get results or post orders, WIFI PDA or
tablet P.C. would make things run much smoother.......
Ah, I see, therein lies the difference. My company issued me an IBM Laptop. I have a docking station at my desk, all of the conference rooms have multiple network connections, with overhead projectors that I can plug into a port in back of the laptop, and I have remote access from home. So no matter where I go, I just bring along a network cable, open the screen, wake the laptop up from standby, plug into the network, and go. Once the buildings on campus were all "Wired Up" I found less need for my PDA. Now if only they would get moving on those Wireless Hot Spots, I be in Geekdom Heaven.
Semi
Semi, I think that some new features would make PDAs more compelling for the rest of us. Right now, they are just glorified pocket organizers, and there is only a limited market for that. I'd like something that wirelessly downloads my emails, can take pictures or video in high resolution, can play hours worth of downloadable music, and which acts like a portable game player for when I'm bored. <G>
A convergence into the mobile phone market is a plus, but then you have a tradeoff of screen size vs small form factor. No matter how good technology gets, you can't have both. Not unless they find a way to "fold" your phone and screen into a smaller device.
wbmw
I have an older Cassiopeia PDA. Granted, not one of the slimmest or lightest on the market, and the handwriting recognition was hit or miss. I agree, if my PDA could do all of the things you suggest, I might still be using it, but right now, where it sits is in it's charging cradle, next to my phone at home.... used as an (expensive) electronic phone book, and I've gone back to carrying my Fab Cleanroom notebook at work.
Maybe someday.......
Semi
Semi, I was also surprised at the number of handhelds in the top 10 with Intel processors. Seven out of ten. And the other three were Palm handheld variants.
http://zdnetshopper.cnet.com/shopping/0-11013-1410-0-0.html?tag=popnav
wbmw
I'm finding it a little hard to generate any personal excitement over Handhelds/PDA's these days. Just looking around in my company, I recall ~2 years ago, everyone was walking around with them. Now, it seems some people have even gone back to those paper day planners. I also seem to recall reading somewhere that PDA sales are down significantly. Could PDA's have been some sort of Fad, that has peaked???
Semi
ZDNET: Top 10 Most Popular Laptops
http://zdnetshopper.cnet.com/shopping/0-8404-1410-0-0.html?tag=popnav
ALL are intel powered...... SWEET!
Semi
Intel Underwrites IPO For Photomask Equipment Maker
http://www.e-insite.net/semiconductor/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA296489&spacedesc=....
Intel Underwrites Micronic Preferential Stock Issue
By Jeff Chappell -- Electronic News, 5/2/2003
Micronic Laser Systems AB today announced it has entered into a joint development agreement with Intel Corp., through which Intel has purchased a Sigma laser pattern generation tool for photomask production.
Täby, Sweden-based Micronic said Intel has also offered to underwrite a preferential shareholders' rights issue. Through that issue, Micronic expects to raise $40 million by selling up to an additional 19 million shares of stock. Micronic shares are traded on the Swedish stock exchange.
---I think it's even more significant that it was noted that ASML also made an "Interest Free Loan" to the company. Their Laser Based Tchnology seems to be gaining on the Electron Beam Technology that's dominant today.
Semi
Maui, VERY good article. I think every Intel investor should read it. I think it's a very good portrayal of Intel's upcoming CEO. Very confident guy, wholly marketing oriented, but also a visionary and a man who will execute. Let's hope he can do what he says.
wbmw
I think he can. I saw/heard him speak in person last year, and I tell ya, I could have sworn that I felt an "energy aura" around the guy. Too bad he can't bottle it, because he could make a fortune.
Semi
Those are the folks I like to call the "ROI Team" ... and I thank you for that!
greg.
You're welcome. Everyone thinks that initial Process Development is so though, should try dealing with 20 Process Tools, 15 Manufacturing Technicians, 24x7 Coverage, a mandate to cut your module costs by 1/2, and increase throughput 20%, all while reducing your Module Yield losses by 10%....... This quarter (just example #'s people), then they would know what busting your butt was really all about.
Semi