Noble Group

[lilvestor]

Whats there to prove? Elman (chairman of the company) owns over 1/5th of Noble group, its reasonable to assume that he is doing this to protect his own interest.

Short of getting him to admit this to the press there is no obviously no way for anyone to prove this, but its a reasonable deduction.

Here's another angle: As sharebuyback comes at a cost, Elman also bears 1/5th of the cost. His decision on sharebuyback had better be rational then. I doubt Sharebuyback can protect shareholders' value indefinitely.

self-disclosure: I have no vested interest in Noble, nor evaluating it. Just curious about the ruckus.

He only owns 1/5th of the company, but he is utilising all of the company's resources to support his own interest.

Think about it this way, Elman can either risk his own money to buy more of Noble's shares in the open market, or he can use the company's funds to do the same thing. Both would achieve the same result, but he would be taking far greater risks if he did it with his own money.

Anyway I doubt he has the financial capacity to buy that many shares...

I think Boustead also doing the same thing. Damn, has it not been the co buying back tonns of shares, I think its share price would have fallen to 70++ cents and I would have vested.

I think Boustead has no/very little net debt, they are in a totally different situation.