-
Originally Posted by CJ
It is an onmarket buy back so only from the Market, not the government I would have thought. Even if the Govt did sell, there is a market price.
I wonder what will happen if the Govt creaps up to say 55% due to the buy backs - will it offload onto the market or hold shoudl there be a future capital raising so that they can be diluted back down to 51%?
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.
~ * ~ De Peones a Reinas ~ * ~
-
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.
-
Member
Forgive me but why not repay debt? Call me old fashioned but paying off debt is always number one in my business dealings.
-
Originally Posted by Winston001
Forgive me but why not repay debt? Call me old fashioned but paying off debt is always number one in my business dealings.
Repaying debt is not 'capital management' winston
Sometimes !capital management! Even goes as far borrowing more and buying back shares at the Sam time ....at least MRP not doing that
'
-
Member
Originally Posted by CJ
Its the first home buyers I feel sorry for!
That's why i'm here. Can't sump the deposit on the house. Now i'm reading this forum and buying shares. Not a bad outcome when SML is involved.
-
Originally Posted by Winston001
Forgive me but why not repay debt? Call me old fashioned but paying off debt is always number one in my business dealings.
because debt is cheap at the moment so a much better return by buying shares.
-
Nah! Gimme the money!
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. . .
-
Originally Posted by surfersteve
the buy back is a very goooooood! idea as the company is cheap as chips as one broker put it recently.....
and the market now has had a chance to pick up a lot of share cheap....
If you say so, but I'd still rather have the money than a paper profit. . .
-
Originally Posted by winner69
Not really Air NZ cash that $1b .... most of it prepaid travel .... still have to spend a lot of that cash to fly the travellers to wherever
Zonks ago AIR raved about that $1b we have in the bank ... we wont go broke and all that stuff .... then the govt bailed them out eh
Ah so --- does AIR make most of its money from investing all this money then?
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.
-
Originally Posted by Zaphod
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.
Seems Labour and Green speakers don't have the basic knowledge about the stock market, or just simply against anything related to National.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks