https://www.yahoo.com/news/gm-president-fires-back-flow-100527572.html
7 replies (most recent on top)
Or spend some of the money on a better and more loyal workforce.
Stock buybacks don't make the company better, like R&D for new products, or increase sales, like with marketing.
They just artificially and temporarily goose the stock price so if you have stock options, you can trade them in for more expensive shares of stock and sell them for more money.
If a company's stock price is collapsing, there's something wrong with the company's fundamentals. Buybacks just temporarily paper over the problems.
If you look at the charts, buybacks just cause a "hill" in the graph, not a higher plateau.
It's a waste of money for the company, and most shareholders don't benefit.
It's better to spend the money on dividends if you want to give money to shareholders, or just reinvest in the company, like with new products and marketing.
"GM is spending more on stock buybacks than they are on U.S. labor."
Another failed analogy.
What does a stock buyback do? It keeps the stock price from tanking. It adds shareholder value. What does a corporation exist to do? Provide shareholder value!
If GM did not invest in itself with R&D, stock buybacks, marketing, etc. there would be NO GM and the stock price would be $2. That's a race to non-existence. What good is that to the UAW?
Stop thinking from the perspective of the working class and start to understand how business works. That's how you win! Here's an article that explains what a stock buyback is and how it benefits a corporation:
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/investing/stock-buyback/
GM is spending more on stock buybacks than they are on U.S. labor. In a review of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings, our research team found that GM has spent more than $21 billion on stock buybacks over the last decade, lavishing Wall Street with the results of our labor. That's not right.
Go crash another pace car Mark. Per your 2019 layoff remarks, you never cared about the employees
In the media we only hear from the side of the extortionist, so Mark wanted to get the truth out there.
Is any of it true?