Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
May 20

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
5/20/2005 5:19 AM 

This, from the San Diego Union-Tribune: another tech company agrees with Cisco's idea to build a market for derivative instruments designed to mimic a value for employee stock options.

"It's a great idea that has the potential to bring some integrity to the valuation process," said William Keitel, Qualcomm's chief financial officer.

This is important for at least one reason: "integrity" is not a concept that tech firms have brought to the table when discussing stock option compensation. Ever.

As for being a "great idea," Coca-Cola's plan to have multiple investment bankers value its stock options as a way around using the Black-Scholes option pricing model was also heralded as a great idea. But don't forget that Coke scuttled the plan. According to accounting folklore, one of the reasons was that the investment bankers intended to estimate the value of the options using - you guessed it - the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Ultimately, the values derived from such hiring such expensive help would be no different than if the accounting staff plopped their estimates into a spreadsheet designed to do such calculations - so Coke scrapped the idea.

A couple days ago, Mr. Myron Scholes - that's his name in "Black-Scholes" - tossed some cold water on the Cisco system, questioning the genuineness of a market for these instruments - and wondering that "somewhere along the line the options [underlying the derivatives] would still need to be valued through an established options-pricing model." Just like Coca-Cola discovered.

Deja vu all over again. But this time it's different. (Maybe the five most dangerous words in the world.) This time, it's the tech companies are trying to present their version of reality and not some mild-mannered beverage maker. Intel made noises last week that it found the Cisco system "a pretty good idea;" now Qualcomm; and the Union-Tribune article quotes Dell's CFO as saying it's interesting. If the SEC buys off on the approach, the tech companies will bray loud and long that the idea works until they convince people it works - even if it doesn't.

Remember, this is the same bunch that once said options couldn't be valued - at all. They said that expensing options was double-counting when in fact it was no-counting. They fooled some of the people all of the time. And they'll do it again.




Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.