Member Info for Smallholde

SUFC, it just supports my thinking that buy backs deliver nothing tangible to the shareholder. I would much rather use the money to fund dividends or better still invested in the business to grow it an improve the SP that way.
It just seems too easy for the BOD, spend billions of our own money, which improves the EPS, with no business improvement. Performance target met, big bonus for them. Then they issue more shares, which we'll have to buy back.
That seems to be a common thread with all companies engaged in buybacks, from my experience
It's my choice to invest here, and as with most things, you tend to focus on matters that need addressing rather than the positives. So apologies for the negativity, just giving my thoughts.

LTI, could you expand on your '...and a further return of about 5p by way of share repurchases' please. I am struggling to understand how you determined that and hence where I tangible have that, unless you are saying it has supported the share price to that effect.

I only referenced billions as that is the current buyback fund. The point remains if they are issuing so many shares that it impacts the share price such that they need to buy back the equivalent, why do it. Surely it then effectively doubles the cost of funding the reward.. I am well aware there are outside factors, but do you honestly believe the current SP demonstrates the strategy is working.
I agree I can sell, but it is a case of weighing everything up, not assessing it on a single aspect I disagree with.

67Sam
A well published plan does not mean it is a good one. Putin has a well published plan!
I agree on your ppoint about issuing of new shares, but the board should be taking that into consideration when setting that reward. If you then have to spend billions to cover it, what is the point.

I am surprised there is no negativity around buybacks. My experience of them, in lots of companies now, has never given me reason to believe there is any real benefit to me a shareholder. I get the point about fewer shares being in circulation and saving dividend money. But from what I see, the directors get an improved EPS (to justify excessive bonuses), purely by spending the company's money, there is no improvement in the business e.g. turnover / profit. I think the money should be used to genuinely improve the business, reduce debt and/ or returned to shareholders. If I was spending over £2billion I would expect a more tangible impact on the business. Am I alone in my thinking ?

I agree with CSDI1962. I have not seen any material gain in the share price I could attribute to share buybacks in any of the companies I had shares in that have done this. It just seems like any easy way for directors to improve the EPS, thereby achieving their bonus target. All done by spending our money (literally billions of £ in some companies) and not improving the business at all.
I’d rather it was invested in genuinely improving the business or as a special dividend.

Of all the companies I have held which have participated in share buybacks I can honestly say I have not noticed any material difference in the share price I could attribute to it. It seems to me an easy way to improve the EPS without having to do anything to improve the business. I am sure the improved EPS gets the directors their bonus though simply for spending the companies (our) money. Far better to invest the money in business improvement or return it to shareholders.

May be of interest to some of you - driver short ages impacting some sites
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57912922