On 2006-10-28, rwwff@xxxxxxxxx <rwwff@xxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
>
> Larry Qualig wrote:
>> Redhat is forced to spend its own money to sop up its worthless stock.
>
> Well, for a company that has some excess cash, buying back stock and
> debt can be a good way to improve the balance sheet. And if you
> suspect that your stock has just taken an artificial hit that will
> dissipate, you should pounce while the timing is favorable.
I think Message-ID Larry (MIDL) is trying to make a point. But it
misses a nuance or two.
MS had to buy back some stock not long back. That was viewed as a
sign of MS slipping.
Now methinks MIDL is trying to claim a similar move by Redhat has a
similar meaning. Or perhaps he's trying to pretend there's some sort of
hypocrisy on the part of some.
However, Larry overlooks an important difference. In the case of MS it
was a need to support their stock price, which was falling under the
burden of competition. In the case of Redhat, it followed the FUD of
someone (Ellison) deliberately talking their stock price downward. The
first was a defensive move brought on by market forces. The second was
a defensive move needed to counter what was brought on by a FUDmeister
of Stevie Blammer proportions.
MIDL should probably stick with exposing all of us linux-using
nymshifters instead of trying to think too hard. That would get him
into less trouble than most of his attempts at trolling and FUDdery.
--
Gobrena: Innovative Microsoft peer-to-peer software.
|
|
