Brian, IMO the issue of stock buybacks, even the recent criticism of them, is considerably more complicated than you may think. There are arguments in favor and arguments against. Given your interest in this area, you may find this particular article interesting:
https://www.investopedia.com/article...ing-or-not.asp
I felt it laid out some of the pros and cons in an objective way and I hope you find it useful.
There is a also an interesting accounting interplay between a company's book value and market value that arises out of a stock buyback that the article doesn't cover. Basically when a company buys back its stock, it is driving down it's book value insofar as it's assets are being debited against a credit to the equity side of the balance sheet. The result? A reduction in outstanding equity, hence a short term boost to EPS and a short term boost to stock price, P/E being equal. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily, but if the incentive for doing so is a boost to executive compensation tied to a stock price boost, the move might not be aligned with a long term investor because it is an undeniable matter of accounting that the result is a smaller balance sheet and a reduction in book value. Most of the time, a long term investor is interested in a growing book value, not a declining one masked by a concentration of outstanding equity.
Under historically normal circumstances, an excess cash situation like this would have resulted in a dividend. But in recent years, the nature of P/E ratios on stock prices caused some smart people to figure out that buying back stock was an inventive way to boost EPS, and influence stock price (and maybe executive bonuses) in a way that dividends will not do. This is one reason why stock buybacks have become the new dividend as a matter of fashion.
I say the boost to price is often short term, because usually the market recognizes when a company is buying back stock in lieu of expansion of its business and the P/E ratio will invariably lose some of the growth factor and usually drop, negating the initial price increase. The other question is whether the cash was utilized in this manner in lieu of reinvestment in the business or other deferred capital spending.
However if the cash had no other uses, and the company feels it's market stock price is not reflective of it's market value, then a buyback can be a perfectly legitimate thing to do. So this is why I say it's complicated.
Some of the hearings on Capitol Hill have gone into the weeds on this subject, and the criticism runs much deeper than Monday morning quarterbacking in light of Covid-19. Basically the complaints are either misappropriation of Federal subsidy or companies stripping their balance sheets to drive up stock prices and executive compensation as described above.
To be clear, I'm in favor of stock buybacks, but only based on the right incentives and under the right circumstances. I know we're way off topic, but I'll end it there.