Thread regarding DXC Technology layoffs

Share buyback draining money from profits

Can you believe the incompetence. Mike Salvino refused 2 bids at more than double the current price saying they were undervaluing the company, then went on to spend billions buying back the company at high cost.

After buying backs 50%+ of the company the shares are at rock bottom price, whilst the American stock market is at a record high. This is complete incompetence losing $300 million every year on buybacks.

The company isn't undervalued, the market has no confidence in the 2nd rate Execs trying to run it. The buybacks must stop.

by
| 981 views | | 6 replies (last May 13, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1ssgIS4P

6 replies (most recent on top)

All the other CEO are doing it so it must be smart to do buybacks. /sarc

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3kao+1ssgIS4P

@ehc+1ssgIS4P you are just as stupid as the Execs, why would shareholders want to waste money on buy backs year after year and see the share Price collapse 60% in 5 years. They get no money out of falling buyback, they actually suffer losses.

Why not wait till the price has collapsed and then buyback at the cheaper, as someone else said they could have bought the company twice over by now.

This was Salvino's stupid greediness and needs to end now. Just shows how bad he was at running a business.

Wake up Raul.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kmc+1ssgIS4P

share buybacks over last 7+ years is > $6B so much more than current value of company and equivalent to $6500 pay per year per employee since DXC created. DXC has also rejected two $10B offers in that time (nearly 3x current market cap). Model example of a well run company.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mti+1ssgIS4P

I’d take 230 each year for 10 years.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mub+1ssgIS4P

"Could have paid the whole companies pay rises for the next 10 years!!"

only if you wanted $230 extra each and then paid for per year for the next ten years....

($300,000,000 divided by 130,000 employees and then divided by 10)

I thought actually that the share buy backs have been about $1bn per year though for several years, so they definitely could have chosen to hand out a fair chunk of that instead of zero.

Although the board are not the owners of this company, the shareholders are and there are about 8 of them that own 90%+ of the company. I suspect the decision for share buybacks is actually from them, not the board (although they will have voted it through)

With no dividends and no price growth, those guys will be leaning heavily on the board to get them some money out. It might not have shifted the price, but they will have exited some holdings without damaging the price further.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ehc+1ssgIS4P

300m wow!!

Could have paid the whole companies pay rises for the next 10 years!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @shq+1ssgIS4P

Post a reply

: