132
Apple has plowed over $500 billion into stock buybacks since 2012 โ more than Visa, JPMorgan, or Exxon are worth
(markets.businessinsider.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
132 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58808 readers
4000 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's usually done to basically pay to increase companies own stock price. They often do it because CEO and executive pay is based on achieving certain goals such as stock price. However, every penny thrown at investors in a buy back is money that could have been used to weather a downturn, or increase employee pay or simply reinvested in the company itself. This often leads to companies then requiring government bailouts to continue functioning when say a global pandemic hits. The Plain Bagel has more detailed video on the ups and downs of stock buybacks on YouTube.
While absolutely true and I believe it should be illegal, Apple is not exactly strapped for cash. If there is one company that could afford buybacks, without hurting their investments, payroll, r&d, hell, even their bottom line hardly budges with these buybacks. They had 166B profit in the last 12 months...
Stock buy backs are a tax efficient way to return money to stockholders.
The real issue is when companies borrow money to do this.
I would say stock buybacks are already a real issue, doesn't matter if they're borrowing the money or not. If companies had to actually invest in their employees instead of their rich shareholders a lot of issues in our society today would be lessened.
This
There is also the oft cited chart about US wage stagnation seemingly starting around the time a Reagan era policy incetivied companies to return more money to shareholders. The implied causation being that stock buybacks and other such rules are in part of or wholly responsible for the widespread wage stagnation. Of course correlation does not prove causation, though it certainly suggests it.
Is there no scenario in which a company could buy back their stocks? Or are companies that offer stock forever stuck with never getting those back? That would kill a lot of opportunities for companies to start up, expand their business, or take advantage of other opportunities to grow. You can't always get money from a bank loan.
I don't think this applies here. Apple running out of cash isn't really a risk right now.