Doc and KZ, it's not me who has the 'hang up' re 'at least 100 shares' -- it's some of my friends and relatives, and a huge percentage of the investing public. And, no matter what you say to them, they cannot get themselves to buy less than 100 shares of anything -- it's a mental thing that I, too, cannot understand.
However, as far as 'splitting' being bad for 'share price', I couldn't disagree more. And the example of QCOM being approx. $140 after splitting 4 for 1 -- that's still $560 'pre-split', and no 'share price' goes 'only up' without corrections along the way -- look at the run QCOM has had, and, imo, will continue to have. And I'll make a prediction that it will split 2 for 1 again soon. Splits have almost always been good for stocks 'in the long run', because more people buy stock when the share price is cheaper, and the more people who buy, the more the company gets 'talked about' and therefore bought by even more people -- thus, after 'shake out', driving the price up, as long as the perception of future earnings looks bright.
We're on the same page, though, with our intentions.
Wishing you well,
dc |
