Your stock is worthless



  • A couple of years ago, I received a small stock portfolio. Today I logged into my back account to have a look, as I do every 3-6 months or so whenever I notice the outrageous management fees I pay. The front page shows me how much my stock is currently worth, and how much it was when bought. All Standard stuff.

    As I looked around I noticed (Coca Cola) is down -43.78%. Considering they were above the original buy price last time I checked, and I haven't heard of anything horrible happening to this rather successful company, I immediately logged on to Google Finance to find out what's going on.

    The stock is actually up on Google Finance. Looking at the Transactions tab, it showed me they just had a stock split 2:1 last August, so the price is lower - but I have twice as much. TL;DR: My bank is telling me I lost nearly half my investment when I actually made a profit.



  • -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!



  • @Ben L. said:

    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.



  • @configurator said:

    @Ben L. said:
    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.

    but "-43.78% less" is in your "what I wrote to tdwtf" column ;)



  • @SEMI-HYBRID code said:

    @configurator said:
    @Ben L. said:
    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.

    but "-43.78% less" is in your "what I wrote to tdwtf" column ;)

    I said "down -43.78%". (I can be a pedantic dickweed too!)



  • @configurator said:

    @SEMI-HYBRID code said:
    @configurator said:
    @Ben L. said:
    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.

    but "-43.78% less" is in your "what I wrote to tdwtf" column ;)

    I said "down -43.78%". (I can be a pedantic dickweed too!)

    And that ain't no double negative, no sirree bob.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @configurator said:
    @SEMI-HYBRID code said:
    @configurator said:
    @Ben L. said:
    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.

    but "-43.78% less" is in your "what I wrote to tdwtf" column ;)

    I said "down -43.78%". (I can be a pedantic dickweed too!)

    And that ain't no double negative, no sirree bob.

    Yes, it isn't not a double negative... Wait a second!



  • TRWTF is stock splits. Oh look, KO is cheaper now, I can buy some! 

    to OP: makes you feel good that your management fees have obviously gone to quality web coding, huh?



  • @RichP said:

    TRWTF is stock splits. Oh look, KO is cheaper now, I can buy some! 


    I take it you're a big owner of BRK.A, then!



  • @configurator said:

    @SEMI-HYBRID code said:
    @configurator said:
    @Ben L. said:
    -43.78 percent less than 100 is 143.78!

    -43.78% is in the change column.

    but "-43.78% less" is in your "what I wrote to tdwtf" column ;)

    I said "down -43.78%". (I can be a pedantic dickweed too!)

    I apologise that while I was pointing out your mistake, I myself made a mistake that doesn't change anything about the original mistake you made.
    (Pedantic dickweedery is fun, isn't it? ;))



  • @fennec said:

    @RichP said:

    TRWTF is stock splits. Oh look, KO is cheaper now, I can buy some! 


    I take it you're a big owner of BRK.A, then!
     

    Heh, I was going to include BRK.a as a counter-example. At some point, the price of an individual share does become relevant to the individual investor, since most trading is done in discrete shares (DRIPs or fractional shares held in an IRA coming to mind as examples where fractional share ownership is common, making the individual price less important).The other end of the spectrum is an over-diluted stock where individual trades have a disproportionate effect on the price, due to (most) trades being priced at a penny change (think SIRI, late 2008).

    The more common scenario (and TRWTF) is thinking along the lines of "stock A is $5 and stock B is $10, therefore stock A is cheaper". That is an all too common theme in stock discussions.

     



  • Whose system can't cope with stock splits? Wanna name-and-shame?

    Edit: and this talk about the goofiness of stock splits, I think the goofiness is that a single share of Google costs over $700 and a single share of Apple is over $500. That's goofy.



  •  They just don't want to become 'penny' stocks when the big correction happens.



  • @bgodot said:

    They just don't want to become 'penny' stocks when the big correction happens.

    If Google goes from $700 to under $5 in a single day, that's not a big correction, that's the Apocalypse.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Whose system can't cope with stock splits? Wanna name-and-shame?

    Bank Hapoalim.



  • @RichP said:

    TRWTF is stock splits. Oh look, KO is cheaper now, I can buy some! 

    to OP: makes you feel good that your management fees have obviously gone to quality web coding, huh?

    It's reasonable to expect that people will buy more of your stock after a stock split. Say you've got $500 to spend on stock in a company. If a share is $90, you have to buy 5 shares and keep the remainder as cash. You've only invested $450. If, on the other hand, a share were $10, you could invest all $500. This is not a huge effect, but it's real. In more technical terms, a firm's management wants its stock to be a more liquid asset, and eye-popping share prices don't serve that end.



  • You guys are gonna laugh at this, but bear with me.

    I think there's also a moral component in keeping your stock price within reasonable limits ($5 - $50), which is that if a single share costs $700, you're basically shutting out a ton of small investors who might otherwise want to invest in your company. A guy working at 7-11 might not be able to spare $700, and even if he can he only has 1 share-- whoop-de-shit. But if their stock were $5, even the 7-11 clerk could buy a dozen shares, enough to feel like he belongs.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    If Google goes from $700 to under $5 in a single day, that's not a big correction, that's the Apocalypse.
    Nahhh... they just announce a 140 for 1 stock split... because, hey, why not 140?



  • @The Bytemaster said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    If Google goes from $700 to under $5 in a single day, that's not a big correction, that's the Apocalypse.
    Nahhh... they just announce a 140 for 1 stock split... because, hey, why not 140?

    If Twitter were publicly traded, I could see them doing a 140 for 1 split just as a marketing gimmick.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.