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.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : INCE - Intercell info??? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Chad Beemer who wrote (2882)8/1/1998 12:35:00 AM
From: Scott H. Davis  Respond to of 3358
 
Chad, the issue regarding a reverse is not based on capital structure, sound reasons. In the minds of most, it is simply a matter of what happens to the fate of share price after reverse splits. The history is so clear, that investors will dump (other will probably short) a stock that reverses. And investors will sell knowing that others will sell en-,masse and sell to preserve capital. It becomes a matter of market psych. Market psych is often irrational, but still very powerfull. Examples - the last 2 years have seen many occurances of a "flight to quality" herd mentality. So we end up with a LOT of small & mid caps with both lower PEs and higher growth rates than the S&P500, but it continues. The following makes no sense either (especially my main investment focus is now on biotechs, with computer networking second) but's another statement on the power of market psych triumphing over fundimentals.

Biotech Investors Ponder -- Is Entire Industry Worth As Much As
Merck?

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 28, 1998--Are 180 biotech companies with more than 300 products
in clinical trials and $7.5 billion in annual R&D spending worth as much as Merck (Nyse:MRK - news), a blue chip Dow
stock with 20 products in clinical trials and $1.7 billion in R&D expenditures?


This not meant as a hostil post, nor does it accuse anubody of anything. But I hope it states why most of us are against a reverse split. The odds are way against a positive outcome. I don't do the lottery or bet horses for the same reason - the odds are against me.

Scott



To: Chad Beemer who wrote (2882)8/1/1998 11:03:00 AM
From: Juli  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3358
 
I have spoken with Paul before. I believe Paul does owe the shareholders an explanation of why he feels a reverse split is necessary or helpful. If he cannot provide that, then he is not acting as a responsible leader. I am sorry, but I do not buy that just because Paul says so, it is so. I need a rationale.