I have to say I am confused by the table of dilutive shares outstanding: how can the 2024 three and nine month figures differ? Are these time-weighted values (from the table itself it would not seem to be)?
Whats even more confusing to me is that the table you used is preceeded with the information that the share counts in that table have been excluded from the diluted earnings calculation bc they are anti-dilutive. Preceeding that statement is on page 29 another table in which the diluted shares is calculated as 203M (to be followed by the table that you used that seem to have been excluded from that calculation due to said anti-dilutiveness...) - on the whole that is very confusing to me. Do you have a view or explanation?
Good question, I simply assumed that the three-month figure was the most recent so I took that. And technically you are right, I should ignore instruments that are out of the money, but they could very well have gotten into the money (given recent stock price increases) and the difference isn't all that substantive.
Ah, so anti-dilutive means out of the money? (Always learning sth new)
Still confused me that the 3 and 9 months 2024 figures differ.
Anyway the way I understand it, the numbers in the table you used should be additive to the shares outstanding -if I understand the paragraph preceding the table in the 10-Q correctly...
Thanks for the write-up.
I have to say I am confused by the table of dilutive shares outstanding: how can the 2024 three and nine month figures differ? Are these time-weighted values (from the table itself it would not seem to be)?
Whats even more confusing to me is that the table you used is preceeded with the information that the share counts in that table have been excluded from the diluted earnings calculation bc they are anti-dilutive. Preceeding that statement is on page 29 another table in which the diluted shares is calculated as 203M (to be followed by the table that you used that seem to have been excluded from that calculation due to said anti-dilutiveness...) - on the whole that is very confusing to me. Do you have a view or explanation?
Good question, I simply assumed that the three-month figure was the most recent so I took that. And technically you are right, I should ignore instruments that are out of the money, but they could very well have gotten into the money (given recent stock price increases) and the difference isn't all that substantive.
Ah, so anti-dilutive means out of the money? (Always learning sth new)
Still confused me that the 3 and 9 months 2024 figures differ.
Anyway the way I understand it, the numbers in the table you used should be additive to the shares outstanding -if I understand the paragraph preceding the table in the 10-Q correctly...
Idk.
Which I did and it's a 'worst-case' scenario (all outstanding options becoming into the money), which might not happen. Anti-dilutive options are actually something else https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/102714/what-are-differences-between-dilutive-securities-and-antidilutive-securities.asp#:~:text=Similarly%2C%20an%20anti%2Ddilution%20provision,than%20the%20investor%20originally%20paid.
Sorry for the confusion