Sure hasn’t stopped their share buyback mission.No mention of the technology issues in this morning's 2Q Marriott Vacations Worldwide earnings conference call. In fact, if you just listened to Steve Weisz's comments, you would assume the Abound program is fully operational today. See this new thread on the conference call:
Marriott Vacations Worldwide 2Q 2022 Earnings Conference Call (VAC) Tidbits
Sure hasn’t stopped their share buyback mission.
Off topic, but share buybacks are one of the most effective tools management has to utilize excess capital. As they said in the call, with $610 million in excess inventory on their books, and no immediately attractive acquisition targets, it's either return capital to shareholders or build up excess cash on their balance sheet. While they could increase the dividend, share buybacks are better because whereas dividends are taxable to shareholders like me, share buybacks reduce the outstanding shares, thus increasing the intrinsic value of each share. I'm not taxed unless I sell the shares and book a capital gain. I love it when the companies I invest in do buybacks.
It seems like they have a plan with IT, perhaps the wrong one. But aside from starting from scratch (which some would argue they should do), throwing more money at it probably won't solve the problem. Incompetence is more likely the issue, but that might require starting from scratch. I wonder anyone's job is on the chopping block because of the IT issues?Buybacks are intended for when companies have no projects to invest to improve their offering. They should invest some of that excess cash in IT rather than padding the CEO and management's stock plan with buybacks.
Someone posted that their IT is outsourced.If IT had more money they could hire more competent people (pay them more) or hire a firm that can fix this.
True. Shoulda bought shares in VACOff topic, but share buybacks are one of the most effective tools management has to utilize excess capital. As they said in the call, with $610 million in excess inventory on their books, and no immediately attractive acquisition targets, it's either return capital to shareholders or build up excess cash on their balance sheet. While they could increase the dividend, share buybacks are better because whereas dividends are taxable to shareholders like me, share buybacks reduce the outstanding shares, thus increasing the intrinsic value of each share. I'm not taxed unless I sell the shares and book a capital gain. I love it when the companies I invest in do buybacks.
Buybacks are not a panacea for shareholders. Case in point, GE (General Electric). GE recently implemented an aggressive buyback program that was not just a dud, but wasted capital that could have been used for many other more productive and forward thinking purposes. MVCI has other uses for that money beyond buybacks, for instance, say, IT improvements. But IT isn't a revenue source in and of itself. So, owners get the shaft and the C-suite gets rich. Buybacks are not a panacea.Off topic, but share buybacks are one of the most effective tools management has to utilize excess capital. As they said in the call, with $610 million in excess inventory on their books, and no immediately attractive acquisition targets, it's either return capital to shareholders or build up excess cash on their balance sheet. While they could increase the dividend, share buybacks are better because whereas dividends are taxable to shareholders like me, share buybacks reduce the outstanding shares, thus increasing the intrinsic value of each share. I'm not taxed unless I sell the shares and book a capital gain. I love it when the companies I invest in do buybacks.
Buybacks are not a panacea for shareholders. Case in point, GE (General Electric). GE recently implemented an aggressive buyback program that was not just a dud, but wasted capital that could have been used for many other more productive and forward thinking purposes. MVCI has other uses for that money beyond buybacks, for instance, say, IT improvements. But IT isn't a revenue source in and of itself. So, owners get the shaft and the C-suite gets rich. Buybacks are not a panacea.
Really? Where have you been the last week plus? I understand that throwing money at a poor solution isn't likely to fix the problem, but admitting that those problems exist BEFORE a failed rollout, and cleaning house/investing in another solution would be the high road here. If you have the excess funds to pay for it, do it. But the C-suite needs its bonuses so I'm not holding my breath that the high road will be taken.Whether that [IT funding] is inadequate funding or just poor management, we can't assess from where we sit.
Really? Where have you been the last week plus? I understand that throwing money at a poor solution isn't likely to fix the problem, but admitting that those problems exist BEFORE a failed rollout, and cleaning house/investing in another solution would be the high road here. If you have the excess funds to pay for it, do it. But the C-suite needs its bonuses so I'm not holding my breath that the high road will be taken.
I have also seen that referred to, but does anyone know if it is true and if so who to?Someone posted that their IT is outsourced.
According to Jesus Cristopher with my online chat, the website is having issues. Yeah, we know.
Well if even J.C. can't fix the problem, then even divine intervention is off the table.According to Jesus Cristopher with my online chat, the website is having issues. Yeah, we know.