Only 2% (25m shares) of the shares are been bought back, so would move the govt from 51% to just over 52% on a pro rata basis.
If they only buy back 24 of the 25m Govt holding would be 51.9966%, they would not even have to file an SSH notice.
Printable View
Yes but if they did 1% per year ...
I actually thought the 2% referred to the full shareholding, not just the non govt shareholding. Unlikely they will buy the full 25m as they have only allcoated $50m - I assume they wont let it drop to $2 per share before buying.
Forgive me but why not repay debt? Call me old fashioned but paying off debt is always number one in my business dealings.
If the company has more money than it knows what to do with, then as a shareholder, I'd rather that they just gave it to me. I like money, and I'll gladly take it off their hands.
A share buyback means that someone else gets the money, and that I can only get some money if I sell my shares. That seems perverse to me.
Ask all those Blackberry shareholders. . .
Things could turn for AIR without a doubt, but as a company it is in the strongest shape it has been for a long time and especially so compared to other airlines. AIR are buying back their shares as well as investing in new more efficient equipment to lower overheads while simultaneously allowing them to expand into new markets.
But regardless of this, the point is that any cash that cannot be spent by the company effectively to is being ploughed back to the shareholders via a buyback which makes perfect sense. We now have Labour claiming (as per the TV3 news tonight) that MRP are taking a further $50m from the pockets of taxpayers to try and increase the SP back to its listing price and intimated that they are doing so at the behest of the Government. What a load of bollocks.