It's interesting to consider that:

1. The share price of META jumped 20% after market on Wednesday, and around 30% intraday on Thursday. Despite earnings being substantially down. This jump in stock price (and indeed the entire QQQ) is largely attributed to Meta's $40bn proposed buyback.

2. This buyback may not actually happen, or if it does, it may not occur to the degree proposed/expected.

For example, see: smu.edu - Jacobsen researchpaper

"The authors analyze 7,602 firms that announced an open market stock repurchase program between January 1985 and September 2012. Findings show that a significant minority of firms -- 40% -- that announce a repurchase program do not repurchase a single share in the fiscal quarter of the announcement; in the entire fiscal year of the announcement, 24% do not repurchase."

I can't recall the source but I recall reading elsewhere that buybacks generally only amount to about 60-80% of what is proposed, and less again when balanced against free stock grants to CEOs, workers etc (which the 'buyback' often offsets).

3. Jim has commented on the BRK board previously, along the lines that buybacks add a little bit of value when the company is cheap, and lose a little bit of value when the company is very expensive. Suppose that this Meta buyback would have added value on the day it was proposed. Will it still add value if the shares bought back now cost 20%-30% more? It seems hard to believe. It seems unlikely that this buyback will now add value - in which case, why is the price up 20%-30%?

(e.g. Jim's Paradox of Buybacks)