Coronavirus (COVID-19 Outbreak) (120 Viewers)

[Fab Fragment]

737 MAX fiasco

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Ronn]

True. Indeed, the Boeing executives need to be in jail and not walking away with million dollar golden handshakes (their recently retired CEO) if reports are to be believed.

They did not break any laws by stock buybacks.

 

[Bjerknes]

Boeing spent 75% of its free cash flow on stock buybacks, now they want a bailout. 6 airlines (American, Delta, JetBlue, Southwest, Alaska and United) spent 96% on buybacks. This is the tax cut money they were supposed to use on expansion, and reinvestment. I have no words.
The real impact of Paul Ryan’s brilliant economic policy making is now demonstrated perfectly.

What's wrong with stock buybacks? At their core, they are supposed to help return profit to shareholders.

 

[Dostoevsky]

It's not about fairness but rather the cost of each decision, the problem resides in the federal reserve and and it's only natural for humans let alone countries or big corps to always exploit a weakness if they see one.

I blame the system, not the company. It's just stupid. I'd be fucking pissed if that was my money as a tax payer.

 

[Bjerknes]

Just to clarify, the bailout is a loan, and i have no problem letting them fail if it is a stance we adopt across the board.

Problem is, the other side of the stance (Bailout everyone) is impossible and will never be done consistently. Nobody is going to bailout the ski resorts for instance, or even smaller firms in general.

 

[Dostoevsky]

What's wrong with stock buybacks? At their core, they are supposed to help return profit to shareholders.

They did not break any laws by stock buybacks.

There's nothing wrong. But if you fuck up then declare bankruptcy. Taking a gamble just because you know you'll get bailed out makes zero sense.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

737 MAX fiasco

If there's any negligence it will be squarely on regulators who allowed it to fly

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Problem is, the other side of the stance (Bailout everyone) is impossible and will never be done consistently. Nobody is going to bailout the ski resorts for instance, or even smaller firms in general.

But indirectly bailing out airline is also bailing out ski resorts

 

[Bjerknes]

The airlines aren't really ran well and probably should fail. The problem is it would probably be the government picking up the assets and trying to run it themselves.

 

[Ronn]

What's wrong with stock buybacks? At their core, they are supposed to help return profit to shareholders.

Keeping you afloat in hard times, like now? Weren’t companies supposed to reinvest their extra cash to grow, and grow the economy subsequently? How is spending 96% on buybacks a step towards this goal?

 

[ALC]

What's wrong with stock buybacks? At their core, they are supposed to help return profit to shareholders.

and the money they used was supposed to be saved for instances like these. If companies require buyouts, then they should be gov’t owned, not private.

buyouts are also a way of stock manipulation and only became legal in ‘82 under a republican president. A terrible Republican president

 

[Bjerknes]

But indirectly bailing out airline is also bailing out ski resorts

I guess it depends on the location of the resorts and whether people will still go. The resorts around where I live don't need air travel. Plus they have been wrecked by a lack of colder weather this year and probably don't have any weather derivatives to help. That will be the next thing, bailing out companies for "climate change."

 

[ALC]

Keeping you afloat in hard times, like now? Weren’t companies supposed to reinvest their extra cash to grow, and grow the economy subsequently? How is spending 96% on buybacks a step towards this goal?

it’s complete BS and it should be illegal. American corporations have no long term plans, the only thing they focus on is quarterly profit and that system needs to die imo

 

[Fab Fragment]

Perhaps I strayed from the topic. But if you dig into the 737 MAX fiasco, it’s quite evident that greed and callous disregard for human life seemed to prevail within certain decision making quarters.

 

[Bjerknes]

Keeping you afloat in hard times, like now? Weren’t companies supposed to reinvest their extra cash to grow, and grow the economy subsequently? How is spending 96% on buybacks a step towards this goal?

and the money they used was supposed to be saved for instances like these. If companies require buyouts, then they should be gov’t owned, not private.

buyouts are also a way of stock manipulation and only became legal in ‘82 under a republican president. A terrible Republican president

If they "knew" the virus was going to destroy them and still went through with the buybacks, that's one thing. But buybacks are supposed to help return value to shareholders through increasing bids on share prices.

If you're concerned with stuff like this, then you should be a proponent of getting government out of the free market. If the government wasn't there to backstop silly decisions, then they probably wouldn't happen as much.

 

[ALC]

If they "knew" the virus was going to destroy them and still went through with the buybacks, that's one thing. But buybacks are supposed to help return value to shareholders through increasing bids on share prices.

If you're concerned with stuff like this, then you should be a proponent of getting government out of the free market. If the government wasn't there to backstop silly decisions, then they probably wouldn't happen as much.

im a proponent of ending bailouts. Companies still need regulation.

 

[Ronn]

If they "knew" the virus was going to destroy them and still went through with the buybacks, that's one thing. But buybacks are supposed to help return value to shareholders through increasing bids on share prices.

If you're concerned with stuff like this, then you should be a proponent of getting government out of the free market. If the government wasn't there to backstop silly decisions, then they probably wouldn't happen as much.

I don’t have any problem with shareholders’s profit. My problem is with trickle down economic policy making. CEOs are doing what they are supposed to do. They get stock packages for their compensation, so they pump it up and then jump out with their golden parachute.

by the way the fact that they didn’t know virus is going to hit is a silly excuse.

 

[Bjerknes]

im a proponent of ending bailouts. Companies still need regulation.

And they have regulation, SOX being one of the big ones. It made one of my jobs 10 times more difficult and inefficient. Now people complain about stock buybacks. Let's just have the government run everything so they can bailout themselves using our money, oh wait they do that everyday.

- - - Updated - - -

I don’t have any problem with shareholders’s profit. My problem is with trickle down economic policy making. CEOs are doing what they are supposed to do. They get stock packages for their compensation, so they pump it up and then jump out with their golden parachute.

by the way the fact that they didn’t know virus is going to hit is a silly excuse.

Then don't bail them out.

 

[Ronn]

And they have regulation, SOX being one of the big ones. It made one of my jobs 10 times more difficult and inefficient. Now people complain about stock buybacks. Let's just have the government run everything so they can bailout themselves using our money, oh wait they do that everyday.

- - - Updated - - -



Then don't bail them out.

Sure. But will that keep them from doing this next time? CEOs got their hundreds of millions. Saving the company is secondary.

 

[Bjerknes]

Sure. But will that keep them from doing this next time? CEOs got their hundreds of millions. Saving the company is secondary.

Those are assumptions that are usually red herrings. Typically CEO's are shareholders, so why would they want to set up their company for failure? Not all companies/CEO's are Enron and Arthur Anderson either.