Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by crazygringo 2157 days ago
So interesting that Apple does this around $400... meanwhile Amazon's over $3,000 and couldn't care less.

It's very curious to me how and why different companies decide whether this is important or not.

3 comments

AAPL's previous 7:1 split happened at $700, bringing the price back down to $100. This split fits in that same vein. It would seem that the board feels "accessible" is in the $100 range, if that's what you're trying to read into the situation.
Berkshire Hathaway is at almost $300k per stock.
Buffett refuses to split BRKA so yes it's that much, but BRKB has split before and so is ~$200/share.
Also consider the difference in voting rights. Voting rights at berkshire require one to literally be rich. Funny that SNAP got shunned by S&P and literally was the genesis for a new rule [1] for excluding new stocks with split share classes yet BRK, GOOG, FB, CMCS, NWS, etc. can still exist in the index. Heck, companies like F & BF have separate voting shares to give families voting rights.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/01/snapchat-excluded-from-sp-50...

My understanding from that article is that SNAP's public shares are entirely non-voting whereas all the other companies' shares have (diluted) voting rights so I don't think it's quite the same even though in practice it pretty much is.
Thank you for pointing this out, I thought BRK.B had no voting rights. I looked it up and learned that BRK.A shares have 6.66 the voting power of the equivalent dollar amount of BRK.B shares. Specifically, each BRK.A share is 1,500x the economic value of BRK.B but 10,000x the voting power. [1]

It turns out that there are indeed share classes of these companies with no voting rights (GOOG, class C) but I haven't found an example of a company that doesn't have some voting shares in non-insider hands.

It's still shitty that the S&P indices barred SNAP while turning a blind eye to the existing inequities. I'm perfectly okay with them barring new split share listings but at least begin to apply it to others that benefit from the lack of corporate governance.

[1] https://berkshirehathaway.com/compab.pdf#:~:text=Berkshire%2....

Seems a lot less relevant now with the rise of fractional shares.
But not if you want to trade certain contracts positions.

For example I'd like to sell some covered calls for my AMZN as a hedge against a correction later, but since I don't own $300k+ of AMZN share, I literally cannot sell a single call contract.

I'm really surprised Robin Hood and others haven't started offering fractional options contracts yet. It seems like an obvious next step for retail trading.

I'm not saying it would be a great idea or anything, just that it's going to happen eventually and being first will probably garner a fair amount of business and attention (both positive and negative).

I imagine fraction option contracts are much less practical.

As an example, I’m currently holding contracts I purchased in March on SPXL and the daily volume is less than 5. With such low volume, the practicality of fractional ownership is not there.