Penny Lane,
I understand the frustration, but......
"How much time has each of us spent dd'ing all the wacky (changing) share structures?"
"What's with all the gimmicks all these degenerate clowns have added?"
If a company is being run by wacky clowns, why would anyone want to be invested in it?
"Why not just have, say, 3 share-structures of 1M, 10M, or 100M, no more splits of any kind, and if the company abuses it share base into needing more than 100M, TOUGH!"
If we're going to have that kind of regulation, why not have regulations that say certain investors should not invest in certain company's because they can not afford it, or it does not fit their style? Apparently many investors agree with the wacky clowns as they continue to stay invested with the company.
I have had several company's over the years have share splits, liked the company, didn't like the split,but the management had morphed into wacky clowns, so I sold and moved on.
Again I understand the frustration, but I also fear to much regulation.