A reverse stock split has nothing to do with the value of a company or the value of your position in that company. You are confused because you are combining different issues. It doesn't matter if a company has a single share of stock or 1 billion shares. The company is worth what the company is worth, which is effectively the market's opinion of future cash flows discounted at a rate that adjusts for risk associated with the certainty of the cash flow. All a reverse stock split does is change the number of shares you own. It doesn't change your % ownership of the company, which is what's important. Dilution is another matter all together and has nothing to do with a stock spit or a reverse stock split. Dilution is a result of new shares being issues, which reduces your % ownership of the company. Dilution is the opposite of a company buying back shares, thus increaseing your ownership position in the company.
Another way to think about this is to draw an analogy to a pie. The pie is the same no matter how many pieces it's cut into. A company is no different. It's worth the same no matter how many pieces/shares it's cut into. The number of shares you own is irrelevant in and of itself. What is relevant is your % ownership. If new shares are issued (a dilution occurs), your total position is worth less because you own a smaller percentage of the company. However, if shares are simply split or reverse split, your total position is worth the same because your ownership percentage is unchanged.
You're right about what you're saying, but not enough to answer the question: Why does a reverse split matter? You aren't mentioning institutional buying policies (don't buy < $5 rule) and rather subtle gimmicks of shorting and put options.
What have you to say when a company dilutes and dilutes, reverse splits...dilutes and ...etc.?
A company cannot be allowed to print its own money.