Ann: FY18 Half Year Results Announcement Date, page-61

I agree that someone's worth as a person has nothing to do with their financial assets and I'm here to neither defend nor oppose Buffett. I am happy to learn from anything valuable he has to say, and also to apply the bullshit detector that so many fail to use.
I also agree that are also deep issues with representation of the interests of minority holders. That being said those minority holders buy into stocks knowing the score that they will not really have a say on how the company is run. If they don't like that then they can choose a different asset class to invest in. No shame in it and nothing stopping them.

Thanks for the link to Graham's article, I will read it later. While i'm in ignorance of his argument, I'm happy to be proven wrong if I learn something. However unless someone can show me how (maybe the article does) I don't agree that share buybacks are the equivalent to milking shareholders.

No one is forcing these people to sell. If someone completes a trade then that person has agreed to pay/receive market price. If the stock price sinks AND the actual value of the company has not declined then the person selling either overpaid in the first place or is making a mistake now (or they rationally weighed up opportunity cost and found another investment good enough to wear the haircut on this one).

While it's true that majority holders would receive a benefit from the buyback (assuming they continue to hold) this is the exact same percentage benefit as everyone else who holds. Again the choice to hold or sell is made by the individual exercising their agency and free will. Buybacks do not explicitly transfer money from minority holders to majority holders.

* If the stock is undervalued by the market then the buyback will transfer wealth from those who sell to those who hold.

* Conversely if the stock is overvalued by the market the buyback will transfer wealth from those who hold to those who sell.

There is no rule that either group must be made up of minority or majority holders.



I will also say that stating that people should have personal responsibility for their finances is not the same as saying "it's your fault that you are poor", it is saying that you have the responsibility to make the most of what you have, and if you stuff that up then yes it's your fault. I will also say that anyone who has sufficient investments that a dividend return from those investments will have a material impact on their finances - that person cannot be classified as "poor". At a minimum I would classify these people as being much better off financially than the vast majority of people on the planet.