Be bigger than that. Most people say it doesn't make any difference. I would like to see Freeport McMoRan's stock split in two. I would gladly take double the number of shares even though I know the aggregate value is the same now. I also know that if the price goes up (and there are no guarantees that it will) then I'll being doing great. It seems like most people on this board are just against change. Don'e be scared. They just harp on the issues. Frankly I would rather have 2000 shares at $100/share than 1000 shares at $200/share.
Good message - I think the discussions generally deal w/ the extremists who believe either a) FCX will never appreciate and reach its potential unless there is a stock split or b) the stock split is a waste of time and energy, and it should not be discussed/analyzed/pursued.
Both sides can make their case and have supportable data, none of which is really verifiable. Did a stock appreciate b/c it split? Ok, prove it - specifically, prove that the split is attributable to the increase by eliminating all other factors (earnings, dividends, rumors, market, spot prices et al) Is a stock failing to appreciate b/c YOU feel it's too much for the normal investor? Again, prove it - there will be countless examples where a company appreciated w/out a split, w/ a split as well as situations where there was no rise after a split.
Overall, I agree with you - the split doesn't change the fundamental value but it does provide emotional benefits. As such, I'm in favor as long as it doesn't distract mgmt.