>A) In terms of reaching such a mark ($1 million) my understanding is, it would seem a lot less likely for the company to reach the $100 PPS valuation post-split than $50 pre-split. Do you agree?<
No—it would be very much easier to reach $100 after a 1:10 reverse split than to reach $50 before such a split. The latter is five times as high a market cap as the former.
>B) Since the number of common shares also proportionately decreases by a factor of 10 does this mean that any single buy would have 10 times the effect than the effect the same buy would have before the split?<
No—a given dollar amount would have roughly the same effect on trading after a reverse split as before, assuming that the trading volume measured in dollars remained approximately the same.
>C) If B) is correct, Then as crou mentions this split could be good for GTCB as, with news of a partner the stock could rocket up, as these 'new' buys will have 10 times their effect as before the split.<
B) is not correct and crou’s assertion is groundless.
>If the abilty to reach the target mark would be impeded by this reverse split, then I might seek to attempt to short, (though with my relative inexperience a scary idea), a proportion to avoid losses.<
Let me offer a word of advice: short-selling ought to be left to investors who fully understand what they are doing. The questions in your post suggest that you have some homework to do before you get to that point. Regards, Dew
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”
AI
