It's a risk to anyone's Capital to hold a company...

It's a risk to anyone's Capital to hold a company where there's a major holder with a high level of control whose interests aren't aligned with small shareholders.

The Capital provided by those holders while publicly listed is useful for all sorts of investment but ultimately (once all that's done) the objective is typically a creep towards full ownership without paying a premium.

During the GFC it made perfect sense to pay down debt but if the board was really committed to being a public company why would they opt for an anaemic buyback over a dividend? Especially when:

1. That buyback has been on a declining share price so has effectively wasted Capital and
2. The primary beneficiary has been the majority shareholder in terms of increased control
3. Increased concentration works against their inclusion in the key indices

Capital Management in the radio game has been similarly wasteful. The media game is largely about influence, not making money (especially not for small shareholders).