What do you think cutting 401k, educational reimbursement and not giving raises did?! The tone at the top is “id--t!”
7 replies (most recent on top)
@1rmc+1bf7H5aj That’s right.
There was something called COVID that ki---d demand for most of what Exxon makes. There are retirement funds, institutions, and individuals that own XOM for the dividend. By borrowing money to pay the dividend, Exxon showed that the downturn was temporary and Exxon would survive and return to profitability. The strategy is working. If Exxon cut or reduced the dividend, the stock would have dropped to $10 or $20 and the D/E would not allow Exxon to borrow money. As a stockholder, if you don’t like what Exxon is doing, sell your shares, as an employee, quit. The three board seats will not have any impact on Exxon.
Playing with the ExxonMobil stock acquisitions and disposals in a pivot table is highly illuminating.
Darren Woods was "gifted" 2820 shares which he sold. At $60/share that is $169k. He was awarded 205k shares. Using same valuation, Exxon gave him $12.3M. Anyone know what "In Kind" means here? Because Woods sold 17866 shares "in kind". $10M right there.
Seems to me that if he believed in the company, he'd be a net buyer instead of a seller.
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getissuer&CIK=0000034088
DW benefits from every payout, now that is how to do it.
Any intelligent investor would realize BORROWING money to pay a dividend is for losers.
They don't know much about employee benefit issues, but they do know that.
Some would call it Ponzi-like.
Ya, so we kept the dividend and shareholders rewarded us with three activist investors.
Do these people even think before opening their mouths?
If they keep paying the dividend, we loose benefits and eventually our job. If they don’t pay the dividend, it’s DW who loses his job. It’s as simple as that.