RE:RE:RE:RE:2028 notes at 6% : PositiveHey Martin. Thanks for that.
This outfit, lead by PB has been a disaster so far, surounded by the likes of Bellemare, dumb Lawyers, and other Financial incompetents.
I wouldn't want a forward split either. I suggested it, for reducing the float. There are other ways, especially at this low share price, as suggested by your post. I'm not crazy about dividends for right now, either. They just aren't in that position yet. Not enough of a track record for the BA pureplay yet, so why risk things for something unnecessary.
I like the minimal buy back program like they've done (68M???). If you want to reward your employees, then pay for it, like we do (the shareholders). It has stablized the stock. On the other hand, this outfit is notorious for just handing out warrants to partners, and bonuses to employees, like the shares were "peanuts". Our eyes open "ON MANAGEMENT" is something we can do for our investment.
MartinStock wrote: Not sure they'll split.... if 2.4b is too much action, they'll do this:
Well received by the market, the operation involves a listed company buying back part of its outstanding securities. The repurchase is intended as an intervention by the said company on its own capital, with the consequence of reducing the number of shares in circulation on the stock exchanges. The management can thus create a demand on its stock market title. Sometimes an aggressive share buyback program can limit downside risk while providing an immediate impact on earnings per share.
Canceling shares (minimizing the number available) also decreases the total amount of dividends payable to shareholders annually, further reducing the share buyback bill.
Through it, the management concerned demonstrates that the security is worth more than the current price granted by investors. In fact, the lower the stock price, the greater the financial benefits of the share buyback program for the participating company.
Management may also wish to return capital to its shareholders, without committing to a costly increase in the dividend. A share buyback program can normally run over a few years and be suspended without difficulty if necessary. The dividend, on the other hand, is almost impossible to decrease or eliminate without creating an abrupt drop in the stock in question.
Moreover, and by canceling thousands of shares, the company is avoiding too great a dispersion of its capital. It is reinforced in the event of a possible insufficient purchase proposal from a competitor.
Note that the share buyback always requires prior approval from the shareholders, as well as the agreement of the stock exchanges concerned.
Yes, such a program is generally beneficial to the shareholder, if the company does not exaggerately issue shares or options to its employees, thereby negating the eliminatory effect of the buyback program. The other side of the coin of such a program may, on the other hand, suggest that the company's growth possibilities are stagnating, since the latter prefers to invest in its own capital instead of considering the possibility of investing in research and development, acquire a competitor or launch new products. Some investors find this strategy futile - or passive, it is