Had I been included in the poll, I would have voted 'Neither'. . .but I'd also be leaning heavily against the idea of buy-backs. I believe that it's in the DNA of of most corporate managers to prefer controlling corporate cash to paying dividends. They are nothing if not self-interested. But that's also human nature.

In addition, if corporate incentive programs such as EPS don't provide for adjustments based on the number of shares issued and outstanding, excluding those in the treasury, then those drawing such programs are clueless. I find it regrettable that a clear majority in this survey thought share buy-backs were a good idea. They might be. . .but, more often than not, I'd bet they're self-serving for executives who are already insanely and ridiculously overpaid in most cases.

If Boards really want to incent senior executives to do the right thing in all of their decision-making, Boards should defer a substantial portion of all bonus monies due all officers and make them payable in long-term bonds of the company. The maturity dates for such bonds would be at least five years after the age at which an executive will be able to draw a full social-security benefit; the bonds would be unable to be sold in the meantime. . .unless the executive dies or is 100% disabled. Extending executives' horizons in this way would, in my view, lead to much better decision-making for all stakeholders, including the executives themselves. The moral hazard aspect of stock buy-backs would also be eliminated.

FWIW, I don't recall Warren Buffett EVER buying back any of Berkshire's shares, either the A or the B series. His politics notwithstanding, I think he's a pretty good bellwether for these kinds of questions.