|
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 2836777)
Oh... and are you in favor of jackets year round again? :)
The Navy and Marines wear their summer short sleeve dress Whites/Blues without a tie. Its not that they don't have ties anyway. They don't do it because it looks ridiculous with a short sleeve shirt. No one else in civilized society, government or private sector, does it either. Literally the only time you see such a display is airline pilots and in Dilbert comics. Maybe we'll be able to rock beards with our ties in short sleeve shirts though. And with any luck, socks with sandals. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 2836795)
Nah, just getting rid of the ties in the summer. We never made the decision to base pilot uniforms on old sea faring traditions of yore; that was a decision made a long time ago and we're stuck with it at this point. Fine.
The Navy and Marines wear their summer short sleeve dress Whites/Blues without a tie. Its not that they don't have ties anyway. They don't do it because it looks ridiculous with a short sleeve shirt. No one else in civilized society, government or private sector, does it either. Literally the only time you see such a display is airline pilots and in Dilbert comics. Maybe we'll be able to rock beards with our ties in short sleeve shirts though. And with any luck, socks with sandals. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 2836856)
We'll be able to spark a doobie before that happens.
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 2836696)
Right. We're running a tight ship, but its also during the absolute easiest time in the history of the industry (including the much ballyhooed regulation era) where the difference between absolute genius and complete incompetent management teams is merely a matter of how many billions in profit you're making ATM.
|
Originally Posted by BobZ
(Post 2836792)
As the song goes...these are the good old days.
Denny |
Originally Posted by full of luv
(Post 2835833)
Many of those other companies (AAL included) have also been spending Billions on their own stock buyback. The general logic is to buy your stock when you feel it's undervalued and you have excess cash without a better plan for investment.
Many an article has been written on both sides as to the efficacy of a company buying back it's own stock with excess cash. Many see the fact that much of CEO's pay in recent decades has been tied to stock performance thereby clouds Mgmt's opinion of buying back it's own stock to reduce supply and drive up the demand/price. |
Buybacks are executive compensation, if it was for investors they would increase the dividend. It's laughable to think an airline can't deploy excess capital.
|
Here is another paper that echos the opinions of most on this sight. It’s certainly a biased paper, but it’s interesting none the less.
http://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/RI_Buybacks-FAQ_022019-final.pdf The issue I have is the last part of the paper, with the proposed solutions. A lot of that is government meddling in “private” money, which I am not a fan of, because ultimately it’s up for the free market to decide (at least in theory). |
The free market is only a rhetorical concept. That said, government bailouts work. GM, Goldman, etc.
|
Stock buybacks allow you to increase dividends without increasing the total amount you pay out. $1 mil paid out to 1 mil stockholders equals $1/share. $1 mil paid out to 500k stockholders equal $2/share. You’ve can increase dividend payouts without spending more money by buying back stock. Increasing dividend payouts and buying back stock are both good things.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:19 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands