Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: killybegs who wrote (3349)	9/5/1998 1:32:00 PM
From: Thomas Kirwin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Reverse Split Commentary Jubimer, I concur that a reverse split can be advantageous for the right reasons, at the right time and only for the right company. Ampex is a company that meets this criteria. A fine example of a stock that appears to have benefited ever so slightly from a reverse split is Boundless Corporation. quote.yahoo.com Regards, Tom P.S. Has anybody noticed that Syquest's market cap is around 30 Million? quote.yahoo.com

To: killybegs who wrote (3349)	9/5/1998 10:48:00 PM
From: Hal Campbell	Respond to of 17679

Good points Jubimer, though i am sure we all had hoped they would recover to the 7 to 8 range on their own eventually. Another advantage of the reverse split ...... stock swaps for acquisitions would become somewhat more tenable.

To: killybegs who wrote (3349)	9/5/1998 11:30:00 PM
From: Ed Perry	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17679

<< feedback and debate ... on the reverse split >> While I personally regard a reverse split as an instance of financial alchemy, it is true that institutional funds are often prohibited by charter from owning low priced stocks. There is also the mechanics of marginable stocks usually restricted to an initial position limit of no less than 5.00/sh. For these, and perhaps other reasons, academic studies have shown announcements of reverse splits to have a long term positive effect on share prices. These effects are similar to but not as strong as effects from a customary split. Finally there is the matter of the PE ratio. Once a stock implodes upon itself (in an "irrational" or "chaos based" sense), it's PE ratio not only falls off the radar screen but the stock becomes relegated to the "shadows". I think it was Ed Trepanski "How to Invest in Technology Stocks" who said that tech stock screens should exclude those issues with PE ratio's below 8. To paraphrase ... "too much trouble down there." One slight segway which may be relevant here is the market breath enjoyed by AXC. Even at these historical and numeric low numbers, there is still an active market with trading mostly in the bid ask range of 1/16. To me this indicates an active following. As an alternative to the reverse split, I would consider recruiting a capital advisory management firm after the pieces of the upcoming acquisition(s) fall into place. Since, these acquisitions have an opportunistic bent to them, nothing can be said at the present about future announcements. Once the product service lineup becomes clear, then it would be time for the advisory service to get the hype machine cranked up. Here the active following nay be sufficient to achieve the desired effect. Ed Perry

To: killybegs who wrote (3349)	9/8/1998 11:50:00 PM
From: David Wise	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

One negative effect reverse splits have is to reduce float, thereby sometimes reducing liquidity which is also important to large investors. AXC has something over 60 million shares outstanding, so 1 for 3 would lower this to 20 million. Worst of all is the implied statement that the company will not have any good news soon that would lift the stock without a reverse split. The psychology of a reverse is a killer. But I did see one reverse that eventually worked (and several disasters). Check out FIBR for example. They went 1 for 3 recently, supposedly to get full NMS listing by having a price over $5.00. The initial post-reverse price was near $9.00, but each share is now below the pre-reverse price of about 2 7/8. This even though the outstanding went from 21 million to 7 million. So they now have revenues of about $100 million and a market cap of $15 - 17 million. To me the only good thing is that I bought some at this price and hope to see it at least back to pre-split price, soon, if they can get back to profitable. My opinion on reverse split? Don't even think about it! But if eps stay level, it would be hard for the P/E to drop any lower. Yes it would be marginable, but if for some reason it dropped back below margin and people had to sell, the price would drop just like FIBR did. Believe me, it doesn't feel good being back to the pre-split price, post-split!