3 ms·
Ok so the company tanked, and they took in investment.. But none of that makes it necessary to do a reverse split.
by im3w1l 6y ago
Ok so the company tanked, and they took in investment.. But none of that makes it necessary to do a reverse split.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- lostmsu 6y ago> Ok so the company tanked, and they took in investment.. But none of that makes it necessary to do a reverse split. Perhaps doing the reverse split was a condition under the investment? I am unsure how this fits into the picture. Did reverse split reduce share values further?
- im3w1l 6y agoThe point of the reverse split is to make sure that people with a small position end up with less than one share so they can be forced out. In the best case this is a move to reduce administrative expenses relating to stockholders who own an insignificant part of the company. In the worst case it's a move to steal their shares by forcing them to sell at an unfair price.
- lostmsu 6y agoHow does owning a fractional shares makes forcing out easier for the rest?