[autokad]

> Because dividends are ultimately why people buy stocks in the first place?

I would disagree, I feel like the mojority of stonk owners think dividends are passe companies, and a real company would reinvest its earnings or buy back stock. I disagree with these people. I think a company that has no intention of paying a dividend is merely an over produced digital collectible.

[Invictus0]

You disagree that buybacks are more tax efficient than dividends?

> I think a company that has no intention of paying a dividend is merely an over produced digital collectible.

So, Amazon is a NFT?

[pixl97]

If Amazon cannot grow, then yes, it's stock price will go down losing you more than you bought the shares for.

[chii]

Therefore, any shareholders of amazon would look to predict when amazon would stop growing, and sell right before the prices have adjusted.

[autokad]

stock buybacks are more tax efficient than dividends, but I disagree they are remotely the same thing. There is plenty of empirical evidence that a stock buyback does little to the stock price in the long run, and I would much rather have the decision what to do with the money even though its less tax efficient.

An NFT is a good way to put it.

[Invictus0]

So if Amazon bought back so many shares so that there were just one left on the public market, you think that the last share would trade for $97?

[pjc50]

I count stock buybacks as "dividends relabelled for tax purposes".

[astrange]

There's other ways to return capital. Another larger company, or Elon Musk, might buy them.