This is a regular HC topic. Generally held opinion seems to be:
- It shouldn't matter but maybe it does, it's a perception thing.
- consolidations are a bad sign, the price usually goes down afterwards, liquidity always falls off.
- splits are a sign of a successful company, liquidity and price usually go up.
I don't know how really true any of these statements are. The stereotype of consolidations is that they're a way for a company to psychologically leave the past behind because new holders have to put in a bit of effort to discover all the previous raises and dilutions. This is very much true of some mining companies I could name.
NEU did a consolidation recently and the argument was that a large share register was a psychological barrier to entry for deal partners. If they pull of a massive deal we'll no doubt applaud their genius. They had about 2 billion shares. It has certainly killed liquidity but that may also have been due to a die off in news flow and the usual ebb and flow of popularity that stocks go through.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
