Best thing is to ignore Buffett. It's a value judgement not an objective truth on buybacks.
By which I mean we don't disagree on any facts.
Personal responsibility is a big thing, buying back shares in a net net in the great depression is a different thing to cancelling the CDD divi to buyback when this was explained up front.
In the shadow of the huge issue of personal responsibility and widespread speculation/delegation of reponsibility it's a non-issue I guess.
I bought SHJ pleased that the majority holders were paying a dividend, if they cancelled it the shareprice went to 15c and they started buying back I would definitely call that a dick move.
There's a thousand ways directors can conspire to screw over small holders.
How about 15% issued AWE shares with no pro-rata to new holders to prevent a takeover, with the share price subsequently doubling in 2 months.
How about Zimi Meka at Ausenco selling out his shareholders at 40c and getting to keep his stake.
How about MMA refusing recapitalisation from Halom, fireselling off the Dampier supply base then issuing 15% to new holders the day before the AGM to prevent a board spill?
In the context of all that yeah it's a minor but if I was a director doing that I wouldn't be able to sleep at night so yeah I think they should be judged and found wanting. I think that's part of personal responsibility as well.
(20min delay)
