Reduced liquidity isn't a bad thing really unless you are looking to be a buyer or seller and can't find a counter-party. There is nothing really wrong with a company having a tight shareholder group that wants to hold for the long term. I know some companies prefer to split shares to lower the price to make their shares more liquid (eg Tesla recently, although the share price was getting large), but liquidity shouldn't be a concern for the board in my mind. What good does liquidity really do?
Being a company that is lightly traded already, I think we find that people buying in or selling out actually have had a decent thought about the value of the business, rather than just buying Afterpay because...... well, because it's Afterpay and everyone talks about it. Because these decisions are more considered for IFT, I think it actually means that our share price is a better reflection of the perceived value than many other companies that are more highly liquid.
Just my thoughts. I am happy for it to remain relatively lightly traded, so a further buy back, at the right price, would be okay with me.
I wonder however if the management group have influence over buy backs. If IFT uses funds to buy back shares and reduce our capital base, that would lead to less invested in assets that they earn fees on. It's not in their interest in that sense to shrink us.
IFT Price at posting:
$7.07 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)