" Everyone keeps talking about how the payoff from stock options are random. This is not the case. Stock options pay off when the company does well, they do not pay off if the company does poorly".
Yes, this is the random part.
" The whole point of stock option is to align the interests of the employee with the interests of the owners (shareholders). This is most important with upper management because the decisions they make affect the value of the company more heavily then the decisions lower down in the company".
I would think that having everyone headed in the same direction would be good, not just upper management.
I dont say it is you, but I have seen some rants here where the ranter says that employees are just a bunch of people looking to screw over their employers, to do the minimum possible, to do nothing at all, if they can, etc, etc. I suspect that they would agree with your point of making options just for the upper management team. The dicotomy I hope I am making visible is the disconnect between the "work harder, you lazy bunch of employees" and "you dont make enough difference to be worth stock options" mindset.
Its funny, you have a very good point. But so does the parent post to yours.
It will be harder to start a company. I dont think I agree that there will be fewer failed startups, however. I dont see the connection, please explain.
"Employees earn income from stock options; hence, the company should record expense".
No company that I have ever had options in has ever gotten to the point where I could excersize. So, excepting the administrative costs, no expense happened for any of them in my case ( and in the cases of my fellow employees ).
How do you account for that? I find it hard to believe that any company will say "well, success rates at startups are 1 in ten make it, so there is a 10% chance we will be standing in five years, lets adjust the expense to reflect that". But from my side, it seems that that ought to be done ( provided the proper calculations are done to see what that works out to for various companies in various stages of life and various industries )...
A: My understanding of this is that in awarding options, the company sets aside the stock that covers the option when they decide to make the award. If this is correct, then the company would not be buying anything, they would be accepting they $50.00/share from the employee, and that would be a gain.
B: " Three years later, when Google sells for $100 / share and you cash in your option, Google will pay the difference b/t the share price and the option price (in this example $50). This is an expense which is tax deductible. Such a deduction creates a GAIN. The gain can be classified as income from continueing operations.... very misleading"
Assuming things work this way, then the deduction is a gain, perhaps, but then isnt the buying of the stock a loss that more than offsets the gain?
Further, if, instead of setting aside the stock to cover the options, they sell it, then that purchase price, the interest on that over the period between grant and excersize, and some small fragment of the resulting profitablity of the company ought to "offset" the costs.
Seriously, my favorite channels dont show good things when I am able to watch them. They are on at weird times, very early morning, while I am at work, etc, etc. Now I record them, and watch them as I like.
Bonus is, when the kids or dogs start fighting, or the wife comes over and *has* to talk, I can press pause, deal with the situation, then go back to what I was watching ( more or less, I have a DirecTivo, and an SA8000 unit, the SA8000 has the uncool habit of coming back out of pause randomly. But, to be fair it is after it has been sitting for an hour or more. )
Course, non of the above float my boat, I am into the older movies, like what is on TCM and AMC. Black and White, baby!
The first step was the dictatorship of the proletariat. No "communist" government ever got past this step. And you are, I think, correct, the following steps are a utopian concept. But I think that what the Soviet Union was praticing was not real communism.
But the "= time(" is where the value is generated. You can trace out from there what does what with it, find them all and determine if you are good or not.
Only checking for time( NULL ) is not good because you might have:
time_t x = 0; time_t y = time( &x );
Then proceed to use y and not x. Checking for time( NULL ) would miss this ( and that is what I was trying to get across in my original post.. ).
Personally, I would search for all time( ) calls, and work out from there, just as you suggest...
you want to grep for "= time(" ( allow for whitespace of various kinds ). Then check to see if what is on the lhs is *not* being used for anything other than error checking.
If he was highly placed enough to hire/fire, then you would think that he would have been able to enforce the idea that the structures seen were bad style. And he would have nothing to complain about... Just a thought.
Doctors are human beings, capable of all the range of human deed and misdeed that everyone else is subject to.
Should they be given carte blanche in their actions? No consequences?
I would agree that it is a bit too easy to sue, and that there are some people who take advantage of that. I dont think that eliminating the ability to take a doctor to court is the answer. That would put us in the position of the doctor being able to do anything with impuny.
Where in the parent ( to your post ) do you see someone looking to make a quick buck?
In every other industry, if you make a mistake in your product or service that harms people, you are liable for that harm. In what way is this different?
I recall the teachers all telling us whippersnappers how lucky we had it that we had not started in the punch card era. And I was grateful that we had not...:-)
I was at Gompers Secondary, a math/computer sci magnet school in San Diego.
We were supposed to have a PDP machine from the start, but there was a delay, so we started with an HP machine downtown. Then they got an 11/40 or an 11/45 for a while, then we finally got the 11/70.
First course was a kinda "intro" course. Learned the basic theory on cardboard thingys called "cardiac". You wrote your program in blocks on the card, and there were a couple of blanks on the card for registers. The Program Counter was moved around the card, and you did whatever the operation indicated was.
Then one year of basic. No, not visual basic, real straight up Dartmouth basic. Then one year of Fortran. I learned Fortran during the last part of the basic course, then corrected the poor Fortran teacher's syntax when she wrote on the board. Learned assembly for the 11/70 in the Fortran class. Then a semester of assembly, then one of Pascal. ( Teacher had a challenge to write a shorter routine than he had written on the board. IIRC, I was the only one in the class to do it. ). Then a year long data structures/compiler construction course.
Somewhere in there I learned about pseudo keyboards.
Also wrote stupid little fly the asterisk around the screen depending on the last button pushed, fire at random things moving around the screen randomly kind of character mode games.
Slashdot Mirror
" Everyone keeps talking about how the payoff from stock options are random. This is not the case. Stock options pay off when the company does well, they do not pay off if the company does poorly".
Yes, this is the random part.
"
The whole point of stock option is to align the interests of the employee with the interests of the owners (shareholders). This is most important with upper management because the decisions they make affect the value of the company more heavily then the decisions lower down in the company".
I would think that having everyone headed in the same direction would be good, not just upper management.
I dont say it is you, but I have seen some rants here where the ranter says that employees are just a bunch of people looking to screw over their employers, to do the minimum possible, to do nothing at all, if they can, etc, etc. I suspect that they would agree with your point of making options just for the upper management team. The dicotomy I hope I am making visible is the disconnect between the "work harder, you lazy bunch of employees" and "you dont make enough difference to be worth stock options" mindset.
Its funny, you have a very good point. But so does the parent post to yours.
It will be harder to start a company. I dont think I agree that there will be fewer failed startups, however. I dont see the connection, please explain.
"Employees earn income from stock options; hence, the company should record expense".
No company that I have ever had options in has ever gotten to the point where I could excersize. So, excepting the administrative costs, no expense happened for any of them in my case ( and in the cases of my fellow employees ).
How do you account for that? I find it hard to believe that any company will say "well, success rates at startups are 1 in ten make it, so there is a 10% chance we will be standing in five years, lets adjust the expense to reflect that". But from my side, it seems that that ought to be done ( provided the proper calculations are done to see what that works out to for various companies in various stages of life and various industries )...
A: My understanding of this is that in awarding options, the company sets aside the stock that covers the option when they decide to make the award. If this is correct, then the company would not be buying anything, they would be accepting they $50.00/share from the employee, and that would be a gain.
.... very misleading"
B: "
Three years later, when Google sells for $100 / share and you cash in your option, Google will pay the difference b/t the share price and the option price (in this example $50). This is an expense which is tax deductible. Such a deduction creates a GAIN. The gain can be classified as income from continueing operations
Assuming things work this way, then the deduction is a gain, perhaps, but then isnt the buying of the stock a loss that more than offsets the gain?
Further, if, instead of setting aside the stock to cover the options, they sell it, then that purchase price, the interest on that over the period between grant and excersize, and some small fragment of the resulting profitablity of the company ought to "offset" the costs.
It isnt the Amiga philosophy so much as it is the mainframe philosophy. Distributed smarts out at the devices, main CPU not concerned with IO so much.
Seriously?
EMail: d davison at gmail dot com
No spaces, eh?
I am thinking that the up front costs will be high. But I dont know how high.
You are watching the wrong channels. :-)
Seriously, my favorite channels dont show good things when I am able to watch them. They are on at weird times, very early morning, while I am at work, etc, etc. Now I record them, and watch them as I like.
Bonus is, when the kids or dogs start fighting, or the wife comes over and *has* to talk, I can press pause, deal with the situation, then go back to what I was watching ( more or less, I have a DirecTivo, and an SA8000 unit, the SA8000 has the uncool habit of coming back out of pause randomly. But, to be fair it is after it has been sitting for an hour or more. )
Course, non of the above float my boat, I am into the older movies, like what is on TCM and AMC. Black and White, baby!
what you suggest is exactly what I thought they might do.
:-)
When should we start working on this?
He wants it to be a Microsoft search thing.
True, which is why I would just search for "time".
My original assertion was that searching for "= time(" was a better search than "time( NULL )", not that = time( was the best search.
The first step was the dictatorship of the proletariat. No "communist" government ever got past this step. And you are, I think, correct, the following steps are a utopian concept. But I think that what the Soviet Union was praticing was not real communism.
First define "saved".
If you mean "stayed with us in 'life'", then you are correct.
If you mean something akin to the Christian notion of salvation, then you are not.
But the "= time(" is where the value is generated. You can trace out from there what does what with it, find them all and determine if you are good or not.
Only checking for time( NULL ) is not good because you might have:
time_t x = 0;
time_t y = time( &x );
Then proceed to use y and not x. Checking for time( NULL ) would miss this ( and that is what I was trying to get across in my original post.. ).
Personally, I would search for all time( ) calls, and work out from there, just as you suggest...
for only 39.95!
( per millisecond, including "lunch breaks", tax not included. Read other fine print on https://oh_no_not_again.com )
you want to grep for "= time(" ( allow for whitespace of various kinds ). Then check to see if what is on the lhs is *not* being used for anything other than error checking.
She is the organic part.
Pretty bright, eh?
If he was highly placed enough to hire/fire, then you would think that he would have been able to enforce the idea that the structures seen were bad style. And he would have nothing to complain about... Just a thought.
I thought it *was* interfaces...
If, isnt that the Interface to the f object?
Maybe they *should* be taught all the above. Then we wont have so many people who are in it strictly for the bucks. :-)
He had the book. Look closely in scene 30497. Bottom of the screen.
Dose Effecting And Labeling Robot.
Doctors are not Gods, that is true.
Doctors are human beings, capable of all the range of human deed and misdeed that everyone else is subject to.
Should they be given carte blanche in their actions? No consequences?
I would agree that it is a bit too easy to sue, and that there are some people who take advantage of that. I dont think that eliminating the ability to take a doctor to court is the answer. That would put us in the position of the doctor being able to do anything with impuny.
Where in the parent ( to your post ) do you see someone looking to make a quick buck?
In every other industry, if you make a mistake in your product or service that harms people, you are liable for that harm. In what way is this different?
I recall the teachers all telling us whippersnappers how lucky we had it that we had not started in the punch card era. And I was grateful that we had not... :-)
I also learned on PDP hardware.
I was at Gompers Secondary, a math/computer sci magnet school in San Diego.
We were supposed to have a PDP machine from the start, but there was a delay, so we started with an HP machine downtown. Then they got an 11/40 or an 11/45 for a while, then we finally got the 11/70.
First course was a kinda "intro" course. Learned the basic theory on cardboard thingys called "cardiac". You wrote your program in blocks on the card, and there were a couple of blanks on the card for registers. The Program Counter was moved around the card, and you did whatever the operation indicated was.
Then one year of basic. No, not visual basic, real straight up Dartmouth basic. Then one year of Fortran. I learned Fortran during the last part of the basic course, then corrected the poor Fortran teacher's syntax when she wrote on the board. Learned assembly for the 11/70 in the Fortran class. Then a semester of assembly, then one of Pascal. ( Teacher had a challenge to write a shorter routine than he had written on the board. IIRC, I was the only one in the class to do it. ). Then a year long data structures/compiler construction course.
Somewhere in there I learned about pseudo keyboards.
Also wrote stupid little fly the asterisk around the screen depending on the last button pushed, fire at random things moving around the screen randomly kind of character mode games.
I fugure it was not too bad for a high school.
I sure loved it!
You forgot to call it the pen-guin input.