News Focus
News Focus
Followers 2
Posts 210
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/21/2003

Re: GGraessle post# 13263

Tuesday, 08/19/2003 5:37:35 PM

Tuesday, August 19, 2003 5:37:35 PM

Post# of 14671
I realize that Hicks' shares are not subject to the reverse split but what I don't understand is why REDUCING the number of shares (via the reverse split) is necessary. Doesn't a reverse split end up decreasing the number of common shares or does the reverse split in effect give Hicks a 10 (common) for 1 (of his preferred) deal?

Again, I apologize for my lack of understanding.

Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today