I too am content with 304M O/S, for the reasons you express (not ``out of line``, liquidity). But when the question comes as to what to do with mass income and no O/H or bills to pay, I`d much rather see a share buy-back over a dividend. The share buy-back scenario would realistically only reduce the float by a relatively small amount (e.g., 100M shares would cost how much?), and the benefits you describe would remain in place with a 200M float.

The big difference is that with a dividend, shareholders get a little cash (and not on their time table), the stock moves up, but the move is not sustained. With a buy-back, the stock moves up, and has a higher likelihood of being sustained. The move up, in real value to shareholders, would likely be equal to or greater than the value of the cash they would receive in a dividend.

Take the current dividend. $15M set aside to cover. $15M would buy at least 10M shares, taking away about 3% of the float, suggesting a ``real`` PPS appreciation of 3%. Apply that 3% to the presumed $1.50/share buy-back price, and you get $.045 - better than the dividend amount using the same amount of money. And it`s sustained, most likely.

You can play with those numbers (e.g., lower buy-back price), but it still comes out about the same in our current PPS range. For instance, $15M and $1.20/share gets `em 12.5M shares or ~4% float reduction; 4% times $1.20/share gets you $.048 PPS appreciation and a value still better than the 4% dividend - sustained.

I`m using logic, which may not apply (this is the stock market). And of course I KNOW nuttin`!

SGE