MS gives dividends for the first time ($870M), stock split, Xbox surprise performer - Page 2

JohnT · January 17, 2003, 00:46

If you own MS stock, then vote for a slate of directors who will increase the dividend. If MS shareholders are pissed about the "too-low dividend", they'll let the board know - that I'm sure about.

JohnT · January 17, 2003, 00:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

MS can afford to give more, and I bet you can afford to give more to charity.

Shareholders aren't a charity, you nitwit. You're supposed to make them money and to not do so when you have the opportunity is a disservice. But since when did MS care about ethics...

And increasing stock value doesn't make them money?

Drake, you're allowing your anti-MS stance to cloud your judgement on this issue. The importance isn't how much the dividend currently is, the importance of this news is that MS is, essentially, saying "we're not a growth stock anymore."

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 00:50

Quote:

However, it's a similar philosophy when you actually think about it rather than troll.

No it isn't. I'm not ethically obligated to give to charity. Microsoft is ethically obligated to make as much money for its shareholders as possible. How is it the same?

Asher · January 17, 2003, 00:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
No it isn't. I'm not ethically obligated to give to charity. Microsoft is ethically obligated to make as much money for its shareholders as possible. How is it the same?

How on *EARTH* do you come to the conclusion that it's ethical to give dividends???

Dividends is not a question of ethics!

Growth companies with insane growth typically do not give out dividends. That's just how it is.

MS' growth is slowing, but they're still growing, so they've implemented small dividends to make up for the slowed growth. The increased value of the stock make investors fortunes, which MS has done over and over again.

That's not unethical at all. It's just...how businesses work. Perhaps you should stop using the

smilie, it's obviously having an effect...

JohnT · January 17, 2003, 00:53

But paying dividends is not "making money" it is "transferring assets." The shareholders already own the $40 billion regardless of whether it sits in a bank or gets put in their pockets.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 00:54

Quote:

And increasing stock value doesn't make them money?

I never said that. My point is that MS stockholders would be making more money if MS would pay a realistic dividend instead of sinking even more money into a warchest that is too large already. The $43.4 billion dollars they have right now is more than enough for any plans MS may have, so isn't it about time they give some of their profits back to their shareholders?

Asher · January 17, 2003, 00:57

BTW, Drake, how do you feel about the Xbox now outselling the Gamecube in the two largest gaming markets?

It came out today that MS sold 1.8M Xboxes in Europe in 2002, while Nintendo sold 1.5M.

The only region in the world where Nintendo's outselling MS is Japan. Japan's gaming market is relatively unchanged, places like Europe and North America are experiencing record growth.

Boris Godunov · January 17, 2003, 00:57

I fail to see how in any way this is a bad thing for MS shareholders.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 00:59

Quote:

I fail to see how in any way this is a bad thing for MS shareholders.

It's not a bad thing, but it isn't that good either. It's disappointing...

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
It's not a bad thing, but it isn't that good either. It's disappointing...

How many MS shares do you own?

Code:

if(shares < 1)
     printf("Shut the **** up");

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:07

Real intelligent...

I don't own any MS shares, as I could hardly afford them. However, I'll let someone else speak for me (a Canadian no less)...

Quote:

But Joe Sirdevan, director of research and portfolio manager for Jarislowsky Fraser Limited, a money management firm based in Toronto that owns approximately 2.5 million shares of Microsoft, said it was getting tougher and tougher for Microsoft to justify such a large pile of cash. "I don't think you could effectively re-deploy that cash into the business. It's too big," says Sirdevan.

Joe is, of course, one of the disgruntled institutional investors I mentioned before.

Quote:

Microsoft has come under increasing pressure from institutional investors to pay a dividend because of its huge cash hoard, which stood at $43.4 billion as of the end of December, up from $40.5 billion at the end of September. Microsoft's war chest has come under even closer scrutiny since President Bush proposed his economic stimulus plan, which includes a tax cut on dividends.

So why don't you shut the **** up?

http://money.cnn.com/2003/01/16/tech...soft/index.htm

Skanky Burns · January 17, 2003, 01:12

Code:

while( 1 )
     System.out.println("MS Sucks");

Not that I believe that, in this case.

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Joe is, of course, one of the disgruntled institutional investors I mentioned before.

Joe owns 2.5M shares. He's obviously not a poor man.

The reason he wants more dividends is he's a greedy bastard. Please continue to back up your assertion that MS is "greedy" for not distributing much higher dividends, again. I missed the part where you somehow argued that MS is more greedy for keeping most of the money inside corporate coffers, rather than giving individual execs billions of dollars in cash?

Quote:

So why don't you shut the **** up?

I realize lots of investors with large amounts of MS' cash want them to release higher dividends.

The reasons are obvious: They're greedy bastards.

You don't own a single share in MS, so I don't see why you care to troll about it so much other than your patently obvious anti-MS sentiments. That's why you should just go away.

Second, you've also failed to assert how MS is greedy for keeping the money in the company rather than giving it out to the rich bastard investors who want to buy a new Porsche.

JohnT · January 17, 2003, 01:19

(at Drake)

Quote:

Microsoft has come under increasing pressure from institutional investors to pay a dividend because of its huge cash hoard, which stood at $43.4 billion as of the end of December, up from $40.5 billion at the end of September. Microsoft's war chest has come under even closer scrutiny since President Bush proposed his economic stimulus plan, which includes a tax cut on dividends.

So why not argue that MS is jumping the gun and therefore screwing their shareholders by declaring the dividend before the legislation gets passed?

Well, now that the idea is in your head, I expect to see the MS bashers jump in on that exact point.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:23

Quote:

The reason he wants more dividends is he's a greedy bastard. Please continue to back up your assertion that MS is "greedy" for not distributing much higher dividends, again. I missed the part where you somehow argued that MS is more greedy for keeping most of the money inside corporate coffers, rather than giving individual execs billions of dollars in cash?

What are they doing with all the money in their war chest, Asher? It's just sitting there, doing nothing for the stockholders. You need a certain amount of cash to do business, but Microsoft's war chest has reached ridiculous levels. It isn't greedy for stockholders to want that money, as it is theirs.

Quote:

You don't own a single share in MS, so I don't see why you care to troll about it so much other than your patently obvious anti-MS sentiments. That's why you should just go away.

Just admit you were wrong about this dividend being "a good deal" and I'll leave. That's your only way out, as there is no way you can prove this was anything other than a token move on Microsoft's part to deflect criticism from stockholders.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:26

Quote:

So why not argue that MS is jumping the gun and therefore screwing their shareholders by declaring the dividend before the legislation gets passed?

Because I don't think that. MS stockholders deserve a realistic dividend, whether or not it is tax free.

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
What are they doing with all the money in their war chest, Asher? It's just sitting there, doing nothing for the stockholders. You need a certain amount of cash to do business, but Microsoft's war chest has reached ridiculous levels. It isn't greedy for stockholders to want that money, as it is theirs.

And it isn't greedy for MS to keep the money, as the board who decides that is ELECTED by the stockholders.

You seem to think it's some kind of dictatorship?

MS has its reasons for stockpiling the money. Hell, Nintendo does the same thing. It's the secret to long term survival.

Things won't always be nice and peacy in the world. The bigger your warchest the longer you can survive and the more you can do.

Quote:

Just admit you were wrong about this dividend being "a good deal" and I'll leave. That's your only way out, as there is no way you can prove this was anything other than a token move on Microsoft's part to deflect criticism from stockholders.

The dividend is a good deal, Drake, deal with that.

1) MS investors never expected dividends in the first place
2) MS investors got dividends

This is not a good deal, how? Because you think they should have given MORE? That would have been a BETTER deal, but it's still a good deal to get 16 cents a share.

Get over it.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:36

Quote:

MS has its reasons for stockpiling the money. Hell, Nintendo does the same thing. It's the secret to long term survival.

And MS is to the point where it can't possibly spend all the money in its war chest. It should start giving a decent portion of its profits to its investors as dividends. And $870 million is not a decent portion...

Quote:

1) MS investors never expected dividends in the first place

This is obviously false, as I've already given you evidence of stockholders demanding dividends.

Quote:

but it's still a good deal to get 16 cents a share.

No it's not. It's a little better than what they were doing before, but it's nowhere near what they should be doing. It was just a token move and I'm not going to praise them for it.

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
This is obviously false, as I've already given you evidence of stockholders demanding dividends.

How does that make it false?
Do you understand what "expect" means?

Obviously not all MS stockholders think the same way. Some will want huge dividends, some won't. People choose what they want via their votes, and that's why it just doesn't make sense for you to argue on behalf of the investor that MS is screwing them or something, because they have a say in stuff like this. You don't.

The big outside investors with 2.5M shares will most likely demand huge dividends. The reason is obvious. This does NOT in ANY WAY say they expected them, which is what you just concluded...

Quote:

No it's not.

Oh my GOD.

You should be thankful you don't have the money to invest, I think you'd lose it all pretty quick.

Again, I'm going to repeat this one last time for you: MS is not a dictatorship. Investors with voting shares can vote, they elect the board, the board chooses what to do with respect to dividends.

If the investors collectively wanted more dividends, they'd vote in a board that'd do that for them. They consistently voted for a board that didn't give out dividends, and that board is giving out dividends now but one's that are not too large. The real reason for this was discussed by JohnT and Oerdin above.

It's just absurd for you to continue whining that this isn't a "good deal" on the basis that they can afford to do more. You either don't understand the concept behind how shareholders interact with their company, or you willfully ignore how it works just so you can troll about MS more.

Shareholders aren't just along for the ride, they choose the board which chooses dividends.

Quit whining.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:43

Quote:

You should be thankful you don't have the money to invest, I think you'd lose it all pretty quick.

A least I can figure a dividend yield...

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
A least I can figure a dividend yield...

Oh, shut up.
It was a brainfart after a long day.

The fact that you put it in your sig and brought it up just now speaks volumes about how well this debate went for you though.

(and before you say it, the quote in my sig is in there not as a personal slam to you, but because it's funny as hell

)

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:48

I thought your 3% figure was pretty funny as well. For a brainfart, you sure did say it with some authority, even though it was obviously bullshit. If MS gave out a 3% dividend, I wouldn't have any problem with them...

Quote:

The fact that you put it in your sig and brought it up just now speaks volumes about how well this debate went for you though.

I'm the only one who has some evidence supporting his view, so I don't think this debate has gone that badly for me. I'd love it if you found someone who said this dividend is anything but a token move...

KrazyHorse · January 17, 2003, 01:49

WTF is drake on about? If MS has that much cash on hand then it will be reflected in their share price. Any they give away will proportionately lower its share price. Dividends are just a way of providing a middle ground so that people get some money right away.

JohnT · January 17, 2003, 01:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
WTF is drake on about? If MS has that much cash on hand then it will be reflected in their share price. Any they give away will proportionately lower its share price. Dividends are just a way of providing a middle ground so that people get some money right away.

You know, this point was so obvious that I forgot it entirely.

Though I did allude to it in my "transfer of assets" post. But still...

KrazyHorse · January 17, 2003, 01:52

? Are those

directed at me? Because I didn't bother reading many of the responses; just drake's outbursts...

KrazyHorse · January 17, 2003, 01:56

****, if he really wants a 5% dividend he can sell 5% of his MS stock...

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:57

Question for JohnT : How much of an effect will having more money in the warchest have on Microsoft's stock price? I know it will have some effect, but it seems like it is getting to the point where it won't do much to add more cash. The money is just sitting around, doing nothing.

Asher · January 17, 2003, 01:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I'm the only one who has some evidence supporting his view, so I don't think this debate has gone that badly for me.

Drake...finding a quote from an investor who wants a new Porsche and immediate satisfaction from a dividend payment does not constitute "evidence".

Again, the board which decides dividends is elected by the shareholders. Obviously some are in the minority and disagree (Joe, you showed being interviewed) and they will reflect that when they vote for the board next.

You're trying your damnedest to make it seem like MS is some ruthless tyrant who hoardes money on its own for no reason at all, regardless of the poor, pathetic investor's wishes.

Drake Tungsten · January 17, 2003, 01:59

Quote:

Drake...finding a quote from an investor who wants a new Porsche and immediate satisfaction from a dividend payment does not constitute "evidence".

Read the whole article, jackass. There are several investors who call this a token move and hope for a larger dividend in the future. I hope they get it.

Asher · January 17, 2003, 02:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Read the whole article, jackass. There are several investors who call this a token move and hope for a larger dividend in the future. I hope they get it.

Oh, that changes everything, SEVERAL investors.

Interviewed by AOL-TimeWarner, of all people.