"compare intel's actual and pro forma (as if) ratios of intangible assets to long-lived tangible assets in 2012. use r& d capitalization to compute this ratio. which of the two values is more relevant? "

Since Intel has a history of effectively transforming R&D investment into income, the pro-forma version of the ration seems to be of more significant. A company starting, for instance, would be unalike: its track record would be much poorer and probabilities are that the criteria set in place would not be as rough as Intel’s. Therefore, it appears that the significance hinge on the kind of business: if future benefit is more of a doubt, then R&D should be expensed. The contradictory is true if benefit is almost certain. Intel also has the advantage of being very vibrant with its R&D objectives and having exact, measurable standards. They note obviously what the funds are apportioned to and what the end outcomes should be of the growth.