While that's true, it's also completely inappropriate to view all reverse splits the same. The majority of reverse splits occur when a company's stock price has fallen to extremely low levels. This is often due to massive amounts of dilution through selling shares in the open market, thus driving the price down while simultaneously increasing outstanding shares, and not having a healthy business or a real path to get to one. Yes, most of these companies will fail, because they are not viable businesses to begin with.
However, reverse splits can also be an effective management tool for managing share price or outstanding shares for any number of legitimate reasons, including as a tool to facilitate uplisting to a major exchange. The difference is that the company has to have actual business prospects in order to sustain any perceived or actual benefit from the reverse split. I won't speak for you, but most of us here believe that CYDY has a future with PRO 140 based on previous trial results. In this case, a well-managed and timed reverse split could absolutely help the company. Am I suggesting that it's necessary or that I'm in support of a reverse split? No, only management has the information necessary to make that call. Am I confident they'll make the correct call on whether to split or not? Not as confident as I'd like to be, but I'll give them the rope, because I believe that the company has a bright future.
The simple moral of the story? Please don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Most companies that do reverse splits fail because they are already failing companies. They don't fail because they did a reverse split.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
