InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 18
Posts 1401
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/19/2009

Re: None

Saturday, 10/23/2010 1:40:11 PM

Saturday, October 23, 2010 1:40:11 PM

Post# of 95123
I believe a 1 for 30 stock split is needed. The major area of potential cost savings from doing a reverse/forward stock split split comes from reduced regulation requirements, should the company have less than 300 shareholders. Sarbanes-Oxley regulations require companies with over 300 shareholders to comply with the increased regulations under the act. If the company is small enough, a reverse/forward stock split could reduce the number of shareholders enough to save the company a significant amount of money.

religions are the opiates of fools