I would think that the perceived motivation of the company by the market in general for a reverse split is the key issue.
If the reverse split is seen as a move to sustain a critical price level to maintain a listing on a major market, then the reverse split is perceived as an effort to support a tanking stock, and the overall perception will be negative - as a sign of desperation or at least significant short term problems.
If the reverse split is perceived to be an action designed to more rapidly achieve a critical price to allow an uplisting from OTC to a major market to allow institutional investors who are restricted by their charters from investing in OTC stocks and to give an imipritur of greater value and stability to the retail investors, then it would be perceived as a positive move. Look at the immediate effects of ONVO doing a reverse split last year and uplisting.
The overall market valuation stays the same. If you have 100 one dollar bills, you have the same value as 10 ten dollar bills. I know that there may be a psychological difference between how a lower versus higher price stock may be perceived and that psychological perception does indeed drive stock price in combination of the fundamental value of the stock. I do not see the logic in the board of a company being overly concerned with the absolute number of shares as opposed to the fundamental value of the company. As I have said before, I am a newbie to penny land. SGLB is my first OTC stock in over 35 years of being in the market, so the psychological factors may well be a bit different here. I bought my first block of shares in mid 2013 with the idea of investing in SGLB, not buying the shares to flip. Perhaps penny land is most often viewed as fertile ground for day trading and flipping and my point of view is investing for longer periods of time and long term capital gains rather than short term gains, which is important to me for my tax situation. Live and learn.
As regards a possible reverse split for SGLB, I would think it would be generally perceived as a positive move in an effort to uplist so,as to become a permissible investment for a broader group of institutional investors. To support a stronger pps stocks really need to have strong institutional support.
