coporal, I still think they should have done that because now they ARTIFICIALLY increased the approved % in relation to the shareholders voted in % when they put it to the vote. But they included the 'NOT SPLITTING' in the RS vote and hence made it official by shareholders agreement.
Then when you mention that comment of mine you should also mention that with hindsight I noticed that PPHM did NOT (NOT) abuse the SAM (SAME) mechanism in the previous reverse split. They only issued the shares via ATM and other programs such as PPHMP on an as needed basis to either finance programs such as SUNRISE or a contingency means (such as in surviving the dose switching in 2012). Other are the investments in AVID which I think no one will criticise.
The reason I possibly am less occupied by the dilution thing is that I know how the market works on news and I take my profits from share price. I do understand that it is different, and I respect it, for those needing the voting power (dilution dilutes voting power) and those that, after PPHM consumes it 500Mil$ tax deduction possibilities and will be allowed to start paying dividends, are aiming for dividends (dilution means less dividend per share).
But I am not counting on that. The PPS evolution on news will fully depends on liquidity and an RS will be good for that (yet again, I prefer NO RS).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
