Furthermore, the pre-and post-grant price pattern has intensified over time (see graph below).By the end of the 1990s, the aggregate price pattern had become so pronounced that I thought there was more to the story than just grants being timed before corporate insiders predicted stock prices to increase.However, under the new FAS 123R, the expense is based on the fair market value on the grant date, such that even at-the-money options have to be expensed.) Because backdating is typically not reflected properly in earnings, some companies that have recently admitted to backdating of options have restated earnings for past years. The exercise price affects the basis that is used for estimating both the company's compensation expense for tax purposes and any capital gain for the option recipient.
The number of shares subject to option was 250,000 and the exercise price was (the trough in the stock price graph below.) Given a year-end price of , the intrinsic value of the options at the end of the year was (-) x 250,000 = ,750,000.Thus, if backdating explains the stock price pattern around option grants, the price pattern should diminish following the new regulation.Indeed, we found that the stock price pattern is much weaker since the new reporting regulation took effect.The graph below shows the dramatic effect of this new requirement on the lag between the grant and filing dates.To the extent that companies comply with this new regulation, backdating should be greatly curbed.