SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Three Amigos Stock Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: milesofstyles who wrote (5537)6/2/1998 9:21:00 PM
From: Magnatizer  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 29382
 
Miles

that all sounds fine and dandy but lets consider a real case scenario on a stock which has split and one that has not. Microsoft vrs Berkshire Hathoway. Microsoft continues to draw interest from the masses because it is relatively affordable to buy. Berkshire Hathoway has limited its potential buyers because it costs more than a real nice car. This gives the demand and liquidity edge to Microsoft. In any business endevor customer demand and product turnover (liquidity) are essential to maximizing your success.

Now I am not saying that Warren is a fool for not spliting, but, I do feel that Berkshire Hathoway would be much higher in market cap if he had.

ht
david



To: milesofstyles who wrote (5537)6/3/1998 8:15:00 PM
From: Sergio H  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 29382
 
Miles, I enjoyed the efficient market discussion on splits last night. I wanted to clarify that my initial statement referred to 2 for 1 splits being bullish for the stock. I don't concider 3 for 2 or 5 for 3 or other splits as a forecaster of a positive future for a stock. Does the efficient market viewpoint take into concideration different split ratios?

I am not familiar with the sources and use statement for stock analysis.

Sergio