Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

Mark Cuban says bailed out companies should never be allowed to buy back their stocks ever again


Recommended Posts

Billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban told CNBC on Wednesday that companies that get federal assistance in response to the coronavirus crisis should be prevented from buying back stock ever again. 

“No buybacks. Not now. Not a year from now. Not 20 years from now. Not ever,” Cuban said on “Squawk Box.” “Because effectively you’re spending taxpayer money to buyback stock and to me that’s just the wrong way to do that.”

He also said, “Whatever we do in a bailout, make sure that every worker is compensated and treated equally — in that the executives don’t get rewarded extra to stick around because they got nowhere else to go.”

On Tuesday, Cuban first argued that any assistance must be designed to reduce inequality between executives and workers. “If we are going to bail out companies, we need to make sure all employees benefit from a turnaround, not just execs,” Cuban said on Twitter. 

Cuban, owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks, said he thought any mechanisms of executive compensation — such as equity or repricing existing stock options — should only be allowed if they are offered to all workers. 

Cuban’s appearance on CNBC came a week after the NBA indefinitely suspended its season after a Utah Jazz player tested positive for COVID-19. 

Cuban said last week he “obviously was stunned” by the decision to pause the season but agreed it was the right move. Mop He said he has urged Mavericks players to take social distancing efforts seriously.  

Cuban also said he was putting together a program to help the Mavericks’ hourly employees who cannot work due to the suspension of games

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good call. Any bailouts should come with a whole list of stipulations. 
 

That said, should UI for those affected by Covid-19 also come with stipulations?  No cigs, no pot, no alcohol, no drugs, no fast food, no filet mignon, etc?  Should Covid UI only be used for rent, utilities, WIC approved groceries, child support, etc?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

Good call. Any bailouts should come with a whole list of stipulations. 
 

That said, should UI for those affected by Covid-19 also come with stipulations?  No cigs, no pot, no alcohol, no drugs, no fast food, no filet mignon, etc?  Should Covid UI only be used for rent, utilities, WIC approved groceries, child support, etc?

Are you kidding? UI is not welfare. We pay for it every hour we work. It’s a benefit you are entitled to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
17 minutes ago, BOHICA said:

Shouldn’t be a bailout for anyone or company.  A bailout should be unemployment and food stamps.

Yep.   Let them fail and re-organize.   The focus of aid should be in the mechanisms ALREADY in place.

 

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BOHICA said:

Shouldn’t be a bailout for anyone or company.  A bailout should be unemployment and food stamps.

 

18 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Yep.   Let them fail and re-organize.   The focus of aid should be in the mechanisms ALREADY in place.

 

Exactly.   And it ends any type of regulation or stipulation that can be manipulated for such things as a bailout.

Edited by racer254
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

That is the term being thrown around with regards to helping workers who may struggle during this coronavirus outbreak.  

Well states UI is a benefit ....any federal subsidy would be an entitlement. Just so we are clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

Well states UI is a benefit ....any federal subsidy would be an entitlement. Just so we are clear.

Agreed. So should we put restrictions on these entitlements if given out as a result of Covid-19?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
2 minutes ago, racer254 said:

 

Exactly.   And it ends any type of regulation or stipulation that can be manipulated for such things as a bailout.

I have operational insurance for things that most likely could devastate my operations.  Fire, tornado's are the main but it might even cover something like this.

I think its pretty short sighted if the travel industry hasn't been able to predict something like this massively impacting their operations....especially the cruise line industry.   Maybe they can't get insured because of all the issues they've had in the past but maybe that's an indication of an industry that just can't work.   Basically like Amtrak. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

Agreed. So should we put restrictions on these entitlements if given out as a result of Covid-19?

I don’t think so as far as individuals are concerned. The companies were reckless with their earnings and woefully unprepared for even the slightest downturn. The individuals being impacted by layoffs are just the victims here

Edited by f7ben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The airlines especially can stuff it.  They've been buying back their stock for ages and since the last downturn have tacked additional fees onto every goddamn thing they possibly can.  Bag fees, change fees, seat selection fees.  Surprised they haven't installed pay shitters.  Fuck them.  Let 'em bleed for a while.

But just in case there is a bailout... AAL is especially cheap at the moment.  :)

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
7 minutes ago, f7ben said:

I don’t think so as far as individuals are concerned. The companies were reckless with their earnings and woefully unprepared for even the slightest downturn. The individuals being impacted by layoffs are just the victims here

Come on Ben....they are not all victims.   Most people working a decent job could easily have a couple months raining day fund set aside.  If you are laid off you should be eligible for unemployment.  Maybe and I mean maybe a bit to cover the gap between the difference in UE wages and actual but the govt doesn't need to take care of everyone wholesale. 

Oh and FUCK CHINA.   We need to make them fucking pay for this. 

Edited by Highmark
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Come on Ben....they are not all victims.   Most people working a decent job could easily have a couple months raining day fund set aside.  If you are laid off you should be eligible for unemployment.  Maybe and I mean maybe a bit to cover the gap between the difference in UE wages and actual but the govt doesn't need to take care of everyone wholesale. 

Oh and FUCK CHINA.   We need to make them fucking pay for this. 

People making 50-60k aren’t saving a dime. No retirement , no rainy day fund....nothing. You are so far removed from lower middle class it’s impossible to see. These people for the most part are poor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

People making 50-60k aren’t saving a dime. No retirement , no rainy day fund....nothing. You are so far removed from lower middle class it’s impossible to see. These people for the most part are poor.

Yep. Ive been saying for years that $5000/month is bordering on poverty. You told me I was fucking stupid many many times.  Glad you are finally seeing the light. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
1 minute ago, f7ben said:

People making 50-60k aren’t saving a dime. No retirement , no rainy day fund....nothing. You are so far removed from lower middle class it’s impossible to see. These people for the most part are poor.

You are wrong.   People can save.   They just need to limit their spending.  I do agree in higher COL area's than mine it would be much, much more difficult.

Have you ever listened to a second of Dave Ramsey's show?   Amazing what people can do when they put their mind to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AKIQPilot said:

Yep. Ive been saying for years that $5000/month is bordering on poverty. You told me I was fucking stupid many many times.  Glad you are finally seeing the light. 

We were talking about in retirement without bills.

5k per month while paying for a home and raising a family and trying to have any life at all is total poverty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...