We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Kev - buybacks haven't started, Italian asset not sold yet etc. You will not see an immediate impact on share price but rather a gradual one. The direction of travel will depend not on the buybacks as much as performance of the remaining assets. I think there are a couple of catalysts for Vodafone that could see it return to £1 of more.
-
"yes, it hasn't crashed from the halving of dividend, Italian sale and investing 4 Billion in Vodafone shares announcement"
It's more or less the same, so they have all just cancelled each other out? Assets sold to generate cash to buy back shares is viewed as zero sum?
Jest
'' look at their share price in last 5 days ''
yes, it hasn't crashed from the halving of dividend, Italian sale and investing 4 Billion in Vodafone shares announcement
Jest
''in the right hands those "worthless" assets will pay their way. Zegona and Swisscom know how to make it successful''
it is all about scale - if all the telco's operating in Spain and Italy merged then that certainly would be successful.
Good move to get out of Spain and Italy to invest in the rest of Vodafone
Kev
''It is still selling off an asset and using the cash to buy back your own shares rather than''
assets that have been of no benefit to shareholders - making no money. Proceeds investing in the rest of Vodafone is a wise move, removing shares that would have been eligible for a high yield return.
''but I'm not clear where the value that will translate into a share price increase''
you need better understanding - a buyback is carried out as a return to shareholders with the aim at reducing share capital. The market values Vodafone on a daily basis
''the belief that once the company is 4 billion lighter, it will be worth the same?''
the 4 billion was not getting any return - the 4 billion will now be getting a return for shareholders via the purchasing of shares. The cancellations will transfer the value to the remaining shares.
If profitability is maintained why should the value of the business drop?
"Providing profitability remains at least the same, then the money spent will be replenished, meaning that providing the market does not give a lower valuation to the business, and because shares are fewer in number, that would mean the price per share would be greater."
But the buy backs are not being funded with profits. They are being funded by selling off chunks of the business that won't be replenished.
According to the article being referred to:
https://hbr.org/2001/04/is-a-share-buyback-right-for-your-company
"Contrary to the common wisdom, buybacks don’t create value by increasing earnings per share. The company has, after all, spent cash to purchase those shares, and investors will adjust their valuations to reflect the reductions in both cash and shares, thereby canceling out any earnings-per-share effect. If increasing earnings per share were the only rationale for buybacks, they would have no impact on value"
Kev
''But Vodafone will have 4 billion less cash afterwards, so why should it translate to a price increase?''
oh dear
''If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 millions shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the companies cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company worth £5million with 5 million shares worth £1 each.''
oh dear
Business valuations are based on assets and profits that can be generated. If a Billion is made via a dividend payment then that loss in assets is reflected in the share price immediately on xd day. The following profitability should then plug that asset gap made from the dividend payment. Buybacks for cancellation are assets (cash) leaving the business very slowly each day over a prolonged period. Providing profitability remains at least the same, then the money spent will be replenished, meaning that providing the market does not give a lower valuation to the business, and because shares are fewer in number, that would mean the price per share would be greater.
Pokerchips, I don't unserstand your point.
My point is very simple.
If a company does a buyback, this does not change the net earnings of the company.
The buyback reduces the number of shares outstanding.
Therefore, earnings per share go up.
Everything else being equal, the price of the shares should go up.
Dividends are a different issue.
If the company pays a dividend, it can keep the same dividend per share, while lowering the total dividend expense. This is another advantage of buybacks.
" the stock price should go up to £2, "
The profit amount would be the same and the allocation of profit to dividends would no doubt stay the same..
.. what you go up would be the div/share and that would be what you would end up paying more to obtain..
March 19 (Reuters) - Vodafone Group PLC (VOD.L):
* VODAFONE : VOXI BY VODAFONE HAS LAUNCHED A NEW LARGE LANGUAGE MODEL (LLM) GENERATIVE AI CHATBOT IN COLLABORATION WITH ACCENTURE
Only improved earnings and BOD performance really improve the SP...along with sentiment etc
Buybacks merely improve the div per share allocation of the total div pool amount
...but the initial total amount still has to come from earnings..
The Investment bankers/Option traders/shorters etc dont care about MCAP ...they merely trade on the likely achievement or not of any BOD guidance and key targets using macro sentiment etc
KenRow, I think Gohanito has already answered.
Anyhow, I had already prepared this example, therefore I post it.
Let’s assume that the market value of a company is £10 million.
There are 10 million shares; each share is worth £1.
Let’ assume that the net profit of the company is £1 million.
Therefore, P/E=10
Now let’s buy back shares worth £5 million. For simplicity, assume that the stock price doesn’t change during the buyback period. At the end of the buyback period, as you correctly says, the company has zero cash and has bought 5 million shares; let’s cancel those shares. Apparently, the result is a company worth £5 million (because cash is now zero), with 5 million shares, each worth £1.
However, the net profit of the company is still £1 million (there is no reason why that should change). That would imply P/E=5. For P/E to remain unchanged, the stock price should go up to £2,
However, it is reasonable to expect a stock price between £1 and £2, for two reasons: 1) the stock price will probably start to go up when the company starts the buyback, therefore fewer shares can be bought; 2) the company has less cash and therefore it is riskier.
KenRow - hopefully the below will prove helpful in understanding buybacks. You can never tell if buybacks will result in share price appreciation as these depends on a host of other factors besides the buyback.
https://hbr.org/2001/04/is-a-share-buyback-right-for-your-company
KenRow, my post was partly wrong, but the correct answer lies in between.
I’ll try to explain it later because I’m out for a walk.
"If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 million shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the company’s cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company still worth £10million (in the balance sheet of the company cash is substituted by the 5 million shares). The residual outstanding 5 million shares are now worth £2 each. "
In the scenario above, it sounds like the shares haven't been cancelled. It should like there would still be 10 million shares but the company would just own half of them?
"If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 millions shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the companies cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company worth £5million with 5 million shares worth £1 each."
What about if I have a company with 60million assets and 50 million debt? I sell 5 million assets, use the cash to buy back shares. I now have company worth 55 milion with 50 million debt. Does that look better to potential investor?
Now the clever ones here will say "ahh but those assets were not paying their way". And this is where we disagree. Not everyone can run a Telco or Google or SpaceX. I can guarantee you in the right hands those "worthless" assets will pay their way. Zegona and Swisscom know how to make it successful, Vodafone doesn't. This is not my view, look at their share price in last 5 days and look at Vodafone. Don't be fooled by the "finance strategy", this remains a Telecom who doesn't know how to run a profitable business in Europe.
"KeRow,
The companies cash in the bank is only a very small factor in the calculation of the market capitalization, so your argument is flawed. You are confusing the companies cash position with market capitalization (worth).
Many companies are in net debt after assets and liabilities are factored in, and yet their market capitalization is positive, not negative, because revenues, profits and cash flow are bigger factors for the MC."
Thanks for the reply.
It is still selling off an asset and using the cash to buy back your own shares rather than, for example, using excess profits such as when an oil &gas company might buy back shares when the oil price has been higher than expected. So why would selling off an asset/using cash on your balance sheet boost the price rather than just cancel each other out?
It just seems like moving money around as the market cap will be less and the number of shares will be less. I'm oversimplifying but I'm not clear where the value that will translate into a share price increase will be unlocked. Is the belief that once the company is 4 billion lighter, it will be worth the same?
KevRow, I think there is a mistake.
You write:
If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 million shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the company’s cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company worth £5million with 5 million shares worth £1 each.
It should be:
If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 million shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the company’s cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company still worth £10million (in the balance sheet of the company cash is substituted by the 5 million shares). The residual outstanding 5 million shares are now worth £2 each.
Then there is a consequence for dividend payout. Assuming that the companies pays a dividend, every shareholder will continue to receive the same dividend, but the total dividend bill will be cut by half.
KeRow,
The companies cash in the bank is only a very small factor in the calculation of the market capitalization, so your argument is flawed. You are confusing the companies cash position with market capitalization (worth).
Many companies are in net debt after assets and liabilities are factored in, and yet their market capitalization is positive, not negative, because revenues, profits and cash flow are bigger factors for the MC.
"Rob
''i suspect it will be of no benefit whatsoever''
it is a 4 Billion euro benefit to shareholders."
But Vodafone will have 4 billion less cash afterwards, so why should it translate to a price increase?
If I have a company worth £10 million and it has 10 millions shares at a £1 each, using £5 million of the companies cash to buy back 5 million shares means I'm left with a company worth £5million with 5 million shares worth £1 each.
There is at least an important shareholder that certainly does not like the new strategy, and that is Xavier Niel. Probably he had bought puts to protect his investment in Vodafone and now he’s selling his stake.
This is good though right? Because the buybacks have more impact if the share price is at 40p than at 80p.
Rob
''i suspect it will be of no benefit whatsoever''
it is a 4 Billion euro benefit to shareholders.
Longtimeinvestor
how much do you think these buybacks would increase the share price
I suppose it depends how long you intend being invested here, in the short term probably zero
So for anyone like myself who just wants to see this rise as quickly as possible i suspect it will be of no benefit whatsoever, I suppose it depends on how rewarding you think this investment will be in the coming years or not, each to his own i suppose