> That was however the intent of the statement: Companies that pay dividends or make share buy-backs are more vulnerable in a crisis [compared to otherwise iden

> That was however the intent of the statement: Companies that pay dividends or make share buy-backs are more vulnerable in a crisis [compared to otherwise identical companies who build a cash buffer]. That's a false dichotomy though. Option three is what, for example, most of the profitable/zero-dividend tech firms do - which is to reinvest to boost market share, perform research and development and enter new businesses instead of returning a dividend to shareholders. No dividends; but no cash pile either. Under your theory, those companies are no better equipped to deal with a crisis.