It looks as though DT's putting their infrastructure (towers and antennas) up for sale with a lease-back agreement. The latest information said they would only pick up a billion or two, but back about a year ago, DT said they were worth considerably more. DT's really been kind of quiet about any progress they're making on debt reduction, and I'm wondering what's going on. DT also said they're putting some realestate up for sale (a couple of billion or so). I wish they'ld let us know a bit more than they have. I will say that I'm betting they'll hit their debt reduction goals, hopefully without selling anymore of those convertible bonds.
So far, no one's ever asked me (or anyone else that I know of). I suspect that it's the Board of Directors making the decision, but I don't know that for sure.
As far as whether or not it does the company any good, that's always kind of questionable. The last figure that I saw said that it costs the company about a billion dollars (based on the last dividend rate). One might think that the company's financial rating would increase if they applied that money towards their debt, and thus, the stock price would go up. That just doesn't seem to happen. On the other hand, when the company announces that it's going to issue a dividend, that attracts more buying interest and increases the stock value. Take your pick. Personally, I would rather have the money in my pocket than DT's. Let the market take care of the stock price.
In the annual report released today they wnt to forego the dividend:
"Given the difficult situation, the Board of Management will suggest foregoing dividend payments for 2002. The Board of Management is submitting this suggestion to the Supervisory Board and a resolution to this effect will be put forward at the 2003 shareholders� meeting. This move would make a valuable contribution to consolidation efforts."
I disagree. Troy is right. The company has opted to ignore their bloated staff and overpay executives at the expense of shareholders. They should deliver the same dividend as last year at a minimum. They will lose many stockholders if they cannot provide a reasonable return on investment.
The second dividend they gave us was only 60% of the first one. Remember, they came up with the excuse that they were too deeply in debt, etc. etc. I wouldn't mind giving up the dividend if it made some material improvement, but I don't think it does. After seeing how much the board makes and how DT's loaded down with thousands of unnecessary employees, I'm having a lot of trouble accepting the idea that the shareholder should give up his dividend. Even a stock dividend would be reasonable. At least we would have something.
I thought that was the case. I had not seen a definitive statement, but I agree, I think that internally it has been decided. I think that it is a mistake. The market is beginning to look heavily at dividends as being a good thing. I think part of the low value of the stock now is that it has suggest that the dividend would go away. I know of at least one person who scratched them off the list as soon as news came out. I do not see it affecting the corporate strength, so I vote for at least the half dividend paid last year.
I guess the information I got on the web was premature. It was my understanding that DT had decided to omit the dividend. Under the circumstances, I have little doubt that they will omit them. They're having trouble finding worthwhile things to sell. We'll just have to wait and see. In any case, they won't be the original amount we got when they started dividends.
DT wrote to me last week to say the dividend
dilemma won't be decided until meeting in
May. I complained about not receiving one.
I don't think they're going to take the money
saved from paying a dividend and "reduce the
debt" so why not.