Forum Archive Index - August 2001

["John & Robyn Armstrong" <jofra@es.co.nz>]

Thanks John W. My mistake, meant 3:1.

 

However the principle remains. By cutting an apple into 3 we still have the same amount of apple (less the costs of cutting it).

 

There may be powerful reasons for splitting but none are based upon mathematics.

 

Also I still fail to see how splitting can improve liquidity and for that matter how can it make a take-over by another company expensive?

 

If you carry the logic to near the extreme then they should have a 100:1 split.

 

regards

 

John