Comments by "Samson Soturian" (@samsonsoturian6013) on "The Debate Over Stock Buybacks, Explained | WSJ" video.

  1. It is an effective way to reward investors and slowly privatize the firm.
    2
  2. It's literally no different from dividends. There's only so much you can spend on that and grow. And most firms aim for growth. Besides, the point of a stock is to eventually reward the owners of the stock.
    2
  3. What does that make dividends? Bribery?
    1
  4. Dude, most companies are not buying back shares at any given time. Buybacks and dividends can be suspended at any time and they often are. But guess what, the above accounts for a TINY FRACTION of earnings. You shouldn't berate corporations when you have no idea how it works.
    1
  5. Neither do you.
    1
  6.  @remyd8767  like essential industries that feed us.
    1
  7. This is about stock markets, not labor management. A lot of companies do give performance based bonuses, especially among upper management.
    1
  8. Some companies do have savings and buy bonds with it. But most companies in the Anglophone world spend excess earnings on growing the company and/or rewarding investors. Also, a bailout is a low interest loan and not a gift.
    1
  9. No one cares.
    1
  10. You're the wrong person to be making these assertions, since you make money shoplifting from these despicable companies.
    1
  11. It's called leverage. Nothing wrong with it except the added risks.
    1
  12. It's called leverage. And historically it's just risky. I'm sure YOU are using leverage in your life right now. As getting a loan to go to college and get job skills is a leveraged investment in yourself. Although a lot of people go crazy with stocks and leverage.
    1
  13. No one cares for your policy recommendations. Besides, right now the SEC is busy reviewing rules on Family Offices, meme stocks, and crypto.
    1
  14. Or how AMC and GME are deliberately screwing over all the chumps pumping the stock because issuing new shares at the inflated market price will save the company. That's something the video missed. Companies mostly buy back shares when they believe they are UNDERVALUED and can get a good price. When they believe they are OVERVALUED they can issue more shares.
    1
  15. You just confessed to being a fake guru scammer.
    1
  16. Not if you know anything
    1
  17. This has nothing to do with that.
    1
  18. Yeah, but they normally don't except during a merger when a larger company buys all shares at once.
    1
  19. Everyone was buying on margin back then. Also, that's why there's a regulatory split between commercial banks and investment banks. No one wants stock market craziness effecting ordinary checking accounts.
    1
  20. No one saw that coming. If they did, these companies would have bought bonds.
    1
  21. They can and often do. There's expansions, pay incentives, employee stock options, dividends, and investing in other companies or bonds.
    1
  22. Most companies do not receive a bailout. Only if Washington judges that the failure of the company will cause suffering on others. For instance, if the Union Pacific Railroad were to suddenly default on their bills, the breakdown of operations will cause wild price fluctuations in essentials like wheat, coal, equipment, beans, cars, and so forth. It makes sense to keep their doors open artificially for other rail companies to buy them up and resume normal operations. Then, of course, there's the usual corporate Darwinism. Like Archegos Capital being allowed to blow up and cruise lines getting cannibalized.
    1
  23.  @OfficerK-D6-37  What isn't debatablede is that you're not familiar enough with Finance to make such assertions
    1
  24.  @OfficerK-D6-37  I don't argue with greedy people. So shut up
    1
  25.  @OfficerK-D6-37  shut up and get drafted, hypocrite
    1
  26. Dude, dividends/buybacks is a tiny fraction of corporate earnings. Like 1% is a large buyback.
    1
  27. A bubble, by definition, requires speculative frenzies, a positive feedback loop, and departure from fundamentals. Buybacks do none of these. Take Berkshire-Hathaway Class A shares, where Warren Buffet buys back all the shares just so he can watch it go up. But not down, since the supply is PERMANENTLY restricted
    1
  28. They generally don't get bailed out. But sometimes the fall of a company causes suffering around them.
    1
  29. You should be double taxed.
    1
  30. The execs are the biggest shareholders, generally owning the majority of the company. Much of the rest is owned by middle management, institutional investors, and rich chumps who like the stock. On any given day, there's tens or hundreds of thousands of shares being traded at the exchange. This is what is being bought.
    1
  31. Many companies are legally required to pass most of their earnings after expenses to shareholders. It's called a REIT.
    1
  32. Issuing shares AFTER a crash won't net a whole lot of profit.
    1
  33. Lose the sycophancy and slander, bozo. It's cringy.
    1
  34. You won't make it far in your career and investing.
    1
  35.  @cyworld2707  The factual errors and wild lack of understanding of the matter was quite enough
    1
  36. Bailouts aren't an option for most companies. The Feds only use them on companies they believe will cause suffering if they fail.
    1
  37. If you're a corporate exec, you could do that.
    1