JDN,
Make no mistake, I am a big fan of this company. I think they are well managed. But I'm quite sure that a stock split requires a significant amount of corporate effort (i.e. paperwork, SEC submissions, legal stuff, etc). Resources were committed to this effort instead of work that would build the business. And for what? To try to create a quick stock price bounce? What is the business case for this?
If the management can rapidly grow the value of this business, the stock price will follow. Stock splits seem to be basically attempts to manipulate the stock price. How does this benefit me as a shareholder? Any short term bounce, IF IT EVEN OCCURED, would be short lived in the big picture.
In my mind, a management that I respected DID take their eye off the ball and the harm it did was to decrease their credibility in my eyes. I'm not saying they're not working their butts off, and I agree their day will come. If they agree, they would spend their time working to make that day come instead of trying to attract short-term momentum investors.
Honestly no offense intended, but I dispute your suggestion that people with real buying power give a crap that the shares are below $30. Even most retail investors now know that you don't have to buy 100 share "board lots" anymore. So absolute share price is irrelevant. If management thinks we'll go "hey look how cheap COHR is compared to last week", I take it as an insult to my intelligence.
I still believe in this company, think it is vastly undervalued, and plan to hold for many years. But management disappointed me by pulling this "trick".
Knowing I'm in the minority,
Andrew |
