RE:RE:RE:RE:Buybacks vs LTD repayment or a teeny tiny dividendNordico wrote: No point in me debating the reasoning of executive share-based compensation; that's just the standard practice in North America, so doesn't matter whether I support it or not.
I'm saying a company should prioritize defending shareprice when shorts bring a valuation down to unreasonable levels (and may push it further if a company doesn't do buybacks), over spending that specific amount of money on debt, yes. Keep in mind Bomber doesn't need to do one or the other - they can and should do both: spend the bulk of net income on LT debt, while spending around $100M (1/5 of annual profit) on buybacks, which is what they're doing.
Letsmakemoredol wrote: Nordico, why do they need to? Just cut a check to the executives for fair market value and be done with it.
So you are saying buybacks and canceling shares are a bigger issue than paying back the long term debt? With BBD's debt and negative equity?
since it appears that 99% of executives immediately sell their shares, it would make it easier just to give them the cash in lieu, no difference from a tax perspective. I have zero issues with them receiving compensation, either in shares or in cash.
I think every dime, outside of executive compensation should be used to pay back debt or give shareholders a teeny tiny dividend, we deserve some rewards as shareholders too. I'm fine if the stock tanks, its easy money to grab more shares like I did late last week for a quick flip next month or early 2025.