Dell Shares - All Comments

CFO Brian Gladden Discusses Dell Q3 Fiscal Year 2010 Performance

Dell Shares — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:38:19 GMT

I am pleased to have Brian Gladden , Senior Vice President and CFO, join us on Dell Shares to provide

DELL-Kristy H — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:10:25 GMT

If you have purchased a qualifying Dell PC with Windows Vista®, you may now be eligible for a free upgrade to Windows 7. If you do not qualify for this free upgrade through Dell, Microsoft has a Windows 7 page with a table describing the editions of Windows Vista that can be upgraded to Windows 7. Per this table, Windows Vista Ultimate can be upgraded to Windows 7 Ultimate. For more details, please click here.

dptrout — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:28:37 GMT

I didn't realize there were professional and ultimate grades of Win 7. I upgraded to Vista Ultimate and was happy about qualifying for a "free" Win 7 when it came out. Now I'm not sure that I haven't been hoodwinked - what flavor of Win 7 will I get? The Ultimate? Somehow I'm skeptical......taken in again.......

Brian Gladden on DellShares: Dell's Q2 FY 2010 Earnings

Direct2Dell — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:24:41 GMT

Dell recently announced our Q2 earnings results for FY 2010. Over on the DellShares blog, our CFO Brian

shiv139 — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:35:47 GMT

Returning shareholder value through buybacks is powerful. It has several advantages over and above dividends. For departing shareholders, demand for shares by the company allows for stronger relative share values, which provides a better capital gain or smaller capital loss on exit. Buybacks are also very tax effective for continuing shareholders; the share count reducing means that the continuing shareholder owns a larger percentage of the company following a buyback; in effect the continuing shareholder has succeeded in securing a higher percentage ownership without a tax burden. Compare this to the dividend re-investment option where there would be a significant tax cost associated with dividend income, which leaves less dollars available for investment. Buybacks also allow employees to be compensated through stock grants and option awards without any threat of dilution. Finally, buybacks can easily be suspended during difficult economic times without having an adverse impact on share prices compared with the reaction on suspending a dividend. Why then not simply return shareholder value using only buybacks? There are a few very significant reasons; firstly a buyback program is not regarded as a dividend by investors. Thus income investors tend to shun shares which reward shareholders only through share buybacks; this lack of investor interest has a significant impact of market value of shares. Secondly, companies are not very good at handling share buyback programs. There is a tendency to buy while shares are relatively expensive and not buy during periods of economic risk when shares are undervalued. When a Company buys its own shares, it is in effect speculating in its shares. I would trust Warren Buffett with a buyback program based on market timing because his business is investing; and when I invest in BRK, I do so for expertise in investing. But for a normal Company the focus is returning shareholder value not investing activity. By this I mean, buy backs should be systematic, with a total payout used to buy back shares during the payout year regardless of market value. Dividends are dangerous too. When a company targets a payout ratio of say 50%; during tough times, suspending dividends might be the outcome. And this is not good for share values. But dividends are very good because they create investor interest which draws liquidity to the share and ensures market values are closer (or even over) to fair values. This is particularly true when a company is large and mature thus unable to benefit from liquidity arriving from buzz and from a large investor base who focus on growth stocks as opposed to on value stocks. It is for this reason I believe a combination of dividends and buybacks is the most effective mechanism for returning shareholder value. Suppose a company returns value through dividends with a payout of 25%; it is likely that such a dividend will be sustainable even in a bad year. The company could return a further 25% payout through a buyback program; in a rough year such a program could easily be suspended with a smaller negative impact on share values. I do realize that Dell shareholders have voted no to dividends. However, this is on account of the management not recommending one. I am sure they would vote yes if a dividend was recommended by management. In the circumstances, it would be interesting to hear exactly why Dell’s management does not support a dividend.

2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Voting Results

Dell Shares — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:41:51 GMT

Today Dell held its 2009 annual meeting of stockholders in Austin, Texas. This meeting comes on the heels

2009 Proxy Statement and Interactive Year in Review

Dell Shares — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:34:29 GMT

In conjunction with our July 17th Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we filed our proxy statement on Monday

2009 Proxy Statement and Interactive Year in Review

Dell Shares — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:34:26 GMT

In conjunction with our July 17th Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we filed our proxy statement on Monday

Comments on the Netbook Effect

Dell Shares — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 22:05:55 GMT

The netbook is a product category that has received considerable attention over the past several months

Jeff Clarke Speaks to Investor Community

ODW - Global Operations — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:02:31 GMT

Jeff Clarke, vice chairman, Operations & Technology, recently sat down with Dell’s Investor Relations