"The question for Intel specifically was: since your stock hasn't been helped by more than $7 billion in share buybacks this year, why not use that cash to boost your meager dividend instead?..."
This must be quite clear for normal people for some time now. I will try to explain to this thread one more time: for this quarter, Intel paid $2.5B cash for the stock, got back $444M, while their official net income was reported as $1.995B. EXCELLENT number one can say, but the overall result of operations is negative, with obvious impact on stock valuation.
Some people continue to argue that the number of shares has been reduced, only 20% of buyback shares were actually exercised, and this must be a good thing. I still maintain that ALL STOCK BUYBACK should be considered as a cost of labor compensation. All, regardless of whether the outstanding number of shares were decreased or not. Why? Because Intel is buying back the stock they issued as options, which goes back for ten years. All these options were already exercised by Intel employees and therefore became a factual form of labor compensation. However, those shares still float, and buying them back at today's prices is just an awfully expensive way to pay the cost of their old labor compensation scheme.
Cheers,
- Ali |
