OK, I'll try to be concise on a couple of your points as you...

OK, I'll try to be concise on a couple of your points as you have clearly misinterpreted and twisted basically everything I typed. I'm all for discussion, but you have really inferred plenty of crap in that reply that is way out of context.

Do some investors care about capital preservation and like to see a healthy buy side, so they can sell immediately if they need to (for whatever reason)?
Yes
Do we have a much healthier looking buy side now?
Yes
Does this matter to some investors?
Yes
Would TNO pre split in the 90c range have been an issue for these individual investors who care about this aspect?
YES

Does a split help to achieve this? (simply squeezing together the bid/buy side by 4.62, even though that is silly to us).
Maybe, it seems to have helped looking at the depth
Are some people irrational and now because the shares available are grouped closer together it entices them?
Probably

I openly agree with most of you points, I've said it will have likely have 0 impact on the way those already invested here (like you and me) will invest.

At no point did I say it will change the way people will invest (inferring I said this is very poor by you IMO). However it may have a positive impact for holders by allowing investors with different investment criteria to us participate here.

This may not be a factor that concerns you from investing, but it may impact investors with larger amounts of money entering as they have a greater chance to exit at a single point. You may not care about this, but some people do believe it or not. This change may open up the company as an investment opportunity to them as this is a criteria for some people.


You have clearly misinterpreted most of my points with this reply among others 'The number of SOI does not affect how people trade stocks. If this person wanted to buy (or sell) $9.2k pre-split, why wouldn't they buy (or sell) $9.2k post-split?'

At the moment if I sell $9.2k worth, it takes out under 2 lines, lets say a from 24c to 23.5c (~2% drop). If this amount was sold pre split at 90c range, every chance that the price drops into the 80's due to lack of depth (mid 90's into the 80's, a ~10% drop). 2% vs 10%... It's hard to sell something at fair value when there is no one there to buy it. I'ts possible a holder may need to sell immediately, is this a ridiculous point to make? Even if the way of creating this is artificial and silly?

For example, I hold only oppies here, pre split I held easily more than 3x what was usually on the buy side, often greater than 5x and even at times 10x. What happens if I needed to sell quickly? It isn't possible, I'd have to drop the price to something ridiculously under fair value and wait for it to be purchased so I can clear some funds.
How about post split? These past couple of days I could not only sell my entire holding in an instant, but also do it without dropping the price more than 50% lol, that's improved quite alot. Do you think the split had nothing to do with this? Do you think I feel the same seeing this?



Thanks for the link...

'Another reason, and arguably a more logical one, for splitting a stock is to increase a stock's liquidity, which increases with the stock's number of outstanding shares. When stocks get into the hundreds of dollars per share, very large bid/ask spreads can result. A perfect example is Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A), which has never had a stock split. Its bid/ask spread can often be over $100, and as of November 2013, its class A shares were trading at just over $173,000 each.'

Is that not the entire point I made?
The bid and ask being significantly separated and disjointed, we had reached a point that this happened.
This matters to some investors.
This has improved significantly post split

Thanks for the most pointless argument to make it to this thread and then actually link me the answer of exactly what I was trying to explain to you. Enjoy the weekend, hopefully we push on to new highs next week!