Hacker News Reader

Comment by SamReidHughes | Hacker News Reader

Should companies not return profits to their shareholders? CEO's should be in jail for doing so? Be serious.

I'm not sure how you got to this post after reading the OP.

Company leadership should focus on returning capital when appropriate. They should not be repurchasing shares at obviously inflated prices as a last-ditch effort to further raise share prices so they can cash out their bonuses. They should be using that money to improve the business.

Basically, leadership needs to think about long-term health, instead of making poor business decisions to improve executive bonuses.

They were repurchasing shares for years and years. If shareholders were unhappy about that, they had every opportunity to replace the board. Or if they are a minority, they can sell. If you’re not a shareholder, you’re free to mind your own business.

Shareholders are not the ones who lose the most when the ravens come to roost.

They definitely should return profits, they shouldn't take on additional debts to increase share price.

All debt is an alternative to raising capital by selling shares and diluting ownership. It doesn’t matter what order you do it in, and sometimes you get a good deal on a loan.

There is a difference between debt as a way to raise capital for growth vs debt as a way to return unearned money to shareholders.

Who do you think is loaning the money?

Capital market participants? Lots of people buy bonds... I am not sure where you are going

We are all loaning the money via fractional reserve banking and our pensions. "Shareholders" aren't just people in fancy suits.

I still don’t get your point? All I am saying companies shouldn’t debt finance buy backs. It doesn’t matter the source or target.

If they were taking money out of the company by buying back stocks and sucking it dry, who are the people loaning them money to do this? Your story implies they're throwing billions into these companies without expecting to get their money back.

My story does not imply that at all. Prevailing interest rates are low so investors seeking returns are willing to take increased risks, especially if the bond is still prime (so as to match their mandate). Thus the rise of BBB. At the same time, bond ratings underestimate fragility of corporate debt (what's new, history is littered with "bond ratings underestimated fragility of X"). Combined with a bunch of moral hazard on the part of people packaging everything, you have the current situation. Basically, I fundamentally blame ultra low interest rates for creating incentives, but a more proximate cause is debt financing of buybacks.

I want to see companies run well, too. Nonetheless, companies should be able to take on debt and return money to shareholders at the same time. A simple example might be moving to a new headquarters. They decide to buy a property and build an office building. They finance this with a loan or bonds, because, well, they need cash to run their company, and that's the right financial vehicle for them. At the same time, they're doing dividends or share buybacks, because their owners want them to. Another example is just, you know, buying stuff or services and getting invoiced with a later due date. That's taking on debt.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com