You really are miserable. Instead of people happy your employer has finally beat expectations two quarters running, you find anything to moan about. Keeping the stock afloat and climbing helps the vast majority of employees long-term.
You really are miserable. Instead of people happy your employer has finally beat expectations two quarters running, you find anything to moan about. Keeping the stock afloat and climbing helps the vast majority of employees long-term.
I want to live in your bubble. You think the Novartis cares about employees? This company cares about money and nothing else.
You feel better now, Pudding Cup? Has your incessant grousing changed anything?It is not "miserable" to ask for equitable treatment. They needed to be dragged kicking and screaming to bring salaries up to range.
They fire people endlessly to help the top 1% make a few more million.
The concept of "one novartis" is even more farcical on a day like today.
And which "vast majority" are you referring to that are kept "long term"? Even the folks who will blindly stay and accept below-market remittance because of their paralyzing fear of the unknown will eventually get shoved out.
Yes, it works this way everywhere - the rich get richer at your expense & they revel in rubbing your nose in it. It doesn't make you " miserable", and you do not have to like it.
$15B in buybacks does improve the company. Run a stochastic model and it will make sense to you.Imagine bootlicking for billionaires who can’t even think of how to use spare $15 billion to improve the company.
$15B in buybacks does improve the company. Run a stochastic model and it will make sense to you.
Bow-wow-wow-yippie-yo-yippie-yeahI’m a doggy.
Woof woof!
Laughable that you think you know what you’re talking about. Stock buybacks are nothing more than a financial gimmickry scheme to pump up executive performance metrics so they hit their bonuses. The actual effect for shareholders is always temporary. Studies have proved that buybacks are worse for shareholders than dividends in the long run. So what it boils down to is this: buybacks are for lazy dumb executives who are out of ideas on how to invest in the business.$15B in buybacks does improve the company. Run a stochastic model and it will make sense to you.
You did not need to post this rant to say that your dumbass knows nothing about stochastic calculus.Patronizing asshole.
Here's what makes sense - it makes you happy when Vas and Victor make more money. I won't speculate why, that's your problem.
Here's what sucks - administrative assistants, R&D and sales continue either go under or barely scrape by.
Raises? Organizational performance bonus?
Fuck that! Not if it costs Vas money!
There's a reason you're the only clown defending those twats, so run along and play with your stochastic model.
Buybacks have also been shown to be good for investors. You have neither the data nor the financial imperatives that led to this decision. You’re another idiot on the internet whining like a child.Laughable that you think you know what you’re talking about. Stock buybacks are nothing more than a financial gimmickry scheme to pump up executive performance metrics so they hit their bonuses. The actual effect for shareholders is always temporary. Studies have proved that buybacks are worse for shareholders than dividends in the long run. So what it boils down to is this: buybacks are for lazy dumb executives who are out of ideas on how to invest in the business.
Imagine..... Whoa, woa.Laughable that you think you know what you’re talking about. Stock buybacks are nothing more than a financial gimmickry scheme to pump up executive performance metrics so they hit their bonuses. The actual effect for shareholders is always temporary. Studies have proved that buybacks are worse for shareholders than dividends in the long run. So what it boils down to is this: buybacks are for lazy dumb executives who are out of ideas on how to invest in the business.
You sound so fun to work with. Glad you’re not on my team. You are free to leave anytime you want. No one is forcing you to stay.It is not "miserable" to ask for equitable treatment. They needed to be dragged kicking and screaming to bring salaries up to range.
They fire people endlessly to help the top 1% make a few more million.
The concept of "one novartis" is even more farcical on a day like today.
And which "vast majority" are you referring to that are kept "long term"? Even the folks who will blindly stay and accept below-market remittance because of their paralyzing fear of the unknown will eventually get shoved out.
Yes, it works this way everywhere - the rich get richer at your expense & they revel in rubbing your nose in it. It doesn't make you " miserable", and you do not have to like it.
Not whining just stating facts. Courtesy of Harvard Business Review:Buybacks have also been shown to be good for investors. You have neither the data nor the financial imperatives that led to this decision. You’re another idiot on the internet whining like a child.
Stick to reading the WSJ, little buddy.Not whining just stating facts. Courtesy of Harvard Business Review:
“ Consider the pharmaceutical powerhouse Merck. On February 22, 2000, Merck unveiled a $10 billion buyback plan—the biggest ever announced. But far from rising, Merck’s share price fell by some 15% in the following month. In the eyes of investors, the buyback only underscored the company’s weaknesses. A number of important patents were approaching expiration; Merck’s drug pipeline was running dry; its own chief scientist admitted that the company could no longer maintain its target 20% earnings growth rate. As one analyst put it: “$10 billion would have funded a lot of research and development. ”Merck’s experience appears to be an increasingly common one: over the course of 1999, companies listed on the NYSE that implemented buyback programs actually underperformed the index by 20 percentage points.”
You did not need to post this rant to say that your dumbass knows nothing about stochastic calculus.
