RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Are the deliveries in line with projections for Q2 ?People always dis reverse splits. But most often they want to blame the split rather than the company that was, and remains in trouble. So that given company sinks, and rather than say the company is awful and deserves the declining price, they redirect and blame the split. That way they can pretend they're somehow not wrong. As far as I'm concerned, that's just delusional thinking.
Personally, I have no problem with the reverse split. Bombardier had wayyyy to many shares out there, and at the price they were, they would be unattractive to many institutions that have minimum price thresholds that they have to honour.
The truth of the matter is simple. A reverse split is just math, only math, and that's it. The company will move up or down accordingly, tied to the prospects the company has. Now, that doesn't mean that there aren't fun and games that get played along the way, in this case what I believe to be some serious grooming. But this does NOT have anything to do with the reverse split.
So to my thinking the R/S is net nothing changed, except that institutions can (and will) become interested given the share price is above their threshold. Other than that, the conspiracy theory around reverse splits is just bunk.
Inuk138 wrote: No I'm not, I firmly believe that BOMBARDIER will succeed in its recovery plan. The success will not be easy but we will see the company come out of it despite the debt which is well under control.
BOMBARDIER is not only a manufacturer of business aircraft, BOMBARDIER is positioned as a key player in the maintenance of business jets worldwide. The company wants to integrate itself in the military market as well, slowly but surely.
Nevertheless, I agree that the R/S was misguided, hasty. And they made huge mistakes in the Cseries but we must turn the page and we have to live with the Beaudoin family, especially Pierre.