Fri, Jul 25, 2014, 12:40 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 3 hrs 20 mins

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Cherokee Inc. (CHKE) Message Board

  • smashersok smashersok Jan 24, 2006 6:05 PM Flag

    Closed new 52wk high!

    Guess not the time to sell this stock. Maybe a split is in order, to get more people interested.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Drop dead you miserable scum bucket.

      What do you know you stupid prick?

      You don't like my opinion so you start throwing out insults. That says a hell of a lot more about you than it does about me.

      You telling me I know little about finance is like Wiliam Hung calling Ray Charles a poor singer.

      I don't start fights and only counterattack. But I'll state my opinions about issues when and where i want.

      You had previously proven that you have a small mind focused on the insignificant and now you demonstrate you are a pretentious, self deluded windbag, and one of life's pathetic losers.

      Keep hunting for those dividends, one of the least important variables in stock picking. You'll find a winner in CHKE while 7 out of 10 will be losers---about what an idiot like you deserves...a little less than a monkey throwing darts.

      Anything else, bozo?

    • >>>>Lets apply the Kiss principal here...splits are good for stocks...<<<<

      no they are not. they are just Kis or just plain stupid.

      now we can move on.

    • Lets apply the Kiss principal here...splits are good for stocks...lets move on....

    • you are absolutely, positively correct. splits make absolutely no difference to the prospective buyer. there is some cost associated with administering the split which for small companies may not be inconsequential.

      i think the data is clear. stocks that don't split do better than stocks that do split, i think because stocks that don't split usually have more brilliant and honorable leaders. the best evidence is warren buffett who has never split BRKA which now sells for $90,000 per share and he uses his influence to fight splits for companies on which he serves as a board member (eg. WPO). he is the only man ever to become the richest man in the world from being strictly an investor. he is the unquestioned best ever.

      GOOG has announced it will never split. they do no evil and rather do things the right way, the open way, the honest way. that stock will soon be in four figures, and then, within the next couple of decades, five figures. if you are young enough, you might live to see it.

    • Let's assume an investor wants to put $800 into a company's stock. If the price per share is $80, the investor can buy 10 shares; if $40, then buy 20 shares; if $20 then 40 shares. What difference does it make to the investor if the investor wants to invest $800 in the company whether the price is $80, $40 or $20? None. If the investor thinks that $20 per share is cheaper and therefore would buy it when he wouldn't buy at $80, then the investor is a fool because it would make no difference to him one way or another when he buys exactly the same interest in the company either way for his $800.

    • Although I agree that shares continuing to rise post split would have done so absent the split, I disagree with your statement about weaker hands. One stock I have held for about 15 years is Brown Forman. It has done a 3-1 and 2-1 split in that time. Each time it split it was in the high 70's or low 80's. To be honest, that's a high price for your average investor and so reducing it to the 30's can open up a whole new crowd of buyers.
      However, when a company is in the 30's I think a split is unnecessary. I would not want to see CHKE split unless it held above 40 for a significant period of time.

    • A split really does nothing but put shares into weaker hands of those who think they are getting a bargin because a $40 share is now $20 after a 2 for 1 split. Placing shares in weaker hands only makes the shares more volatile. I also doubt that the split makes the shares go up. Rather, I think that most commonly the shares have been going up before the split and simply continue to do so afterwards. Personally I don't care whether these shares split or not bercause that is irrelevant to me as a long term holder.

    • split would just dilute. The shares are cheap enough as is. Enjoy the spetacular dividend and and increase in price is just a bonus.

      • 1 Reply to jmcollur
      • Huh? How can a stock split dilute? You end up the same but with a lower stock price that may attract more interest in the retail end. Plus, with a low float company like CHKE, it puts more shares into circulation.

        Just to be clear, if CHKE does a 2:1 split then you get 2 shares for every 1 share that you hold and the stock price is only adjusted in half.

        While there is no change, stock splits do something to the mentality of investors/traders as historically stock splits generally do contribute to a rise in price barring larger market events.

        I have held for over 2 years and kept waiting for it to come back down to buy more. Should have bought a lot more back when it was in the high 20s/low 30s.

        Good fortune and higher returns to all that visit this extremely active board.

        W&L.

 
CHKE
16.43-0.03(-0.18%)Jul 25 10:38 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.