Jewish World Review Feb. 3, 2003 / 1 Adar I, 5763
James K. Glassman
Nothing wrong with breaking a buck
One of the consequences of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the recession, the three-year bear market and the impending war with Iraq is that investors have fewer choices. For example, between January 2000 and December 2002, the number of stocks listed on NASDAQ, the hot-white center of dynamic capitalism, has fallen by about 1,000, or more than 25 percent.
More than 800 companies were listed for the first time on NASDAQ during that period - an encouraging figure. But many more dropped off - because they merged with another firm or went out of business, or because they failed to meet the market's standards for corporate governance or financial strength.
After the attacks on New York and Washington, NASDAQ wisely eased one of its financial requirements - which had forced the de-listing of companies that traded below $1 per share for four months. Now, NASDAQ wants to extend that policy.
Frankly, I don't understand why NASDAQ - or the New York Stock Exchange, which has a similar policy - de-lists companies simply because their stock prices are low in dollar terms. It's a dubious measure even in the best of times.
Right now, investors need all the help they can get. Certainly, many decrepit companies richly deserve de-listing, but others simply need time for the economy to recover, geopolitical risks to die down and their own business strategies to pay off. De-listing consigns a company to something called the "bulletin board" - a dim purgatory that practically insures further stock price declines and, often, a trip straight to the netherworld of capitalism.
De-listing does the most harm to a company's loyal shareholders - the ones who are willing to stick with a company through thick and thin, to hold on during the bad times in order to reap the benefits during the good times.
To gain a listing on NASDAQ in the first place, a company needs, among other things, either $30 million in shareholder equity or $75 million in market value. Those are good standards for financial stability. The market's new proposal is that, under certain circumstances, if a company can maintain those levels, it won't be summarily de-listed just because its stock price has been lower than $1 a share. Instead, the company will be given up to two years, to get its price back up.
If it were up to me, I would eliminate the dollar requirement entirely. The price of a stock is completely arbitrary. If you were starting a company and needed to raise $1 million in equity capital, you could sell 10 million shares for 10 cents each, 1 million shares for $1 each or 100 shares for $10,000 each - or variations on that theme. Your choice would be strictly a marketing decision, not a substantive financial one.
Consider two U.S. stocks. Alleghany Corp. is a conglomerate with interests ranging from insurance to (literally) nuts and bolts. Alleghany was trading Thursday at $165.78 per share. The second is more familiar: Sun Microsystems, maker of workstations and servers. Sun, at the same time, was trading at $3.20.
Which is the larger company, with more financial resources?
Sun, by far. With 3.1 billion shares outstanding, its market capitalization is about $10 billion. Alleghany, by contrast, has only 7 million shares out, for a market cap of less than $2 billion. At last report, Sun had $9.8 billion in shareholders' equity; Alleghany, $1.4 billion.
By promoting the idea that a low dollar price necessarily indicates a dangerously weak company, exchanges do investors a disservice. Of course, it is often true that a 50-cent stock is close to worthless. But not always. Even at 50 cents (and let's hope it never gets there), Sun would be worth well over $1 billion.
In other countries, stock prices that we would consider low are commonplace. In Britain, for example, prices are quoted not in pounds but in pence. Cadbury Schweppes, for instance, the giant food products company, was recently trading at 332 p., or about $5.47, a share. BT Group, the country's main telecom firm, was trading at 166 p. And several components of the FTSE 100, Britain's equivalent of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, were trading at around a buck, including Invensys at 48 p. (79 cents).
It's true that "penny stocks" acquired a bad name, especially in the 1980's when unscrupulous promoters defrauded innocent investors. Exchanges need safeguards and tough enforcement, and both the NASDAQ and the NYSE have shown they are serious about weeding out bad actors. But breaking a buck should not mean automatic exile to the bulletin board. There's nothing at all wrong - and a good deal right - when healthy companies trade at low, affordable prices.
Enjoy this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor James K. Glassman is the host of Tech Central Station. Comment by clicking here.
01/17/03: Dogs of the Dow
01/09/03: Eyes on the prizes
12/10/02: Time to kill, not coddle
12/02/02: Time for a drug binge?
11/13/02: The world, your oyster
10/28/02: Why stocks don't stink
10/09/02: The debt bet
09/30/02: Caution, competition ahead
09/19/02: Shopping for opportunities
08/26/02: Stop the Dumb Bond jokes
08/20/02: Moving on from 'sustainablity'
08/06/02: Put Dow doubts to rest
07/29/02: Your money for your life
07/15/02: Have your cake
07/09/02: Competition cure-all
06/26/02: Rebalancing Act
06/21/02: Technology Back on Track
06/19/02: Star Power?
06/12/02: The Beautiful Line
06/10/02: Squashing broadband
06/06/02: Frank investing advice
06/04/02: Say it ain't so, George
05/29/02: He moves in mysterious ways
05/22/02: Reel in these stocks
05/15/02: It's a "small" world
05/02/02: Japanese stock growth?
04/30/02: Trust the Bells?
04/24/02: Being there is best revenge
04/18/02: I'm a Seoul man
04/16/02: Analyze this
04/09/02: The Dot.Con con game
03/21/02: The companies you keep
02/28/02: Trusting monopolists
02/22/02: How not to get taken when buying stocks
02/06/02: Investing After 9/11
01/30/02: Blue Light Specials? Advice on snapping-up K-Mart or Enron stock
01/24/02: Dare to be obscure
01/16/02: Bank on this
01/10/02: What goes down...
01/04/02: An asset-focused investor finds 'deep value' stocks
12/26/01: High-Tech Funds Low On Tech
12/19/01: Tech Sector: Blodget, Meeker, and You
12/12/01: Enron's lessons: Be skeptical of experts
12/04/01: CLECs alive and well, but not if Tauzin-Dingell passes
11/15/01: The "Next Big Thing" in Technology?
10/30/01: A National I.D. Card? Yes; Run By Larry Ellison? No
10/25/01: Without Bayer, we're bare to bioterror
10/18/01: The Battle of Biotech
10/05/01: Two Techs for Tough Times
09/26/01: The Information War
09/05/01: Tech firms built to last through tough times
08/23/01: Stocks on the A-List
08/17/01: Labor and management finding online learning to their liking
08/08/01: Game makers poised to profit
07/19/01: Trade Promotion Authority: High-Techís Key Component for Competitiveness
07/12/01: Nothingís arbitrary about the contrarians
06/27/01: Look to Politics to Find Broadband's Market Cap Shortfall
06/22/01: Tech Commodity Buys Available for Mining
06/18/01: The Blackout Portfolio
06/14/01: The conservation myth stars as latest (sub)urban legend
06/07/01: Will America go high tech on the high seas?
06/05/01: 'Price gouging' doesn't cut it as reason for rising energy prices
06/01/01: Authentication tools opening up opportunities in online security
05/25/01: 'Price gouging' doesnít cut it as reason for rising energy prices
05/21/01: Banking on High-Tech Education
05/17/01: It's No Time to Go Wobbly on Kyoto
05/02/01: Diversify with techís leaders
04/26/01: To Revive The New Economy, Release A Chokehold Break Up The Bells
04/24/01: Whoís To Blame For Broadband Crisis? Wired Article Points To Bells
04/19/01: The Bush Budget
04/12/01: To revive The New Economy, release a chokehold --- break up the Bells
04/04/01: Even as stocks have fallen, the Net keeps booming
03/28/01: Whereís The Profit In Biotech Future?
03/22/01: The Joy of Debt: The last thing we should want is a U.S. Treasury flush with cash
03/19/01: 'Defensive' Stocks in the NASDAQ
03/15/01: Bush administration must say no to Jane and Kyoto
03/08/01: Time to buy small caps? Consider these five great techs
03/01/01: Billís and Larryís continued political adventures
02/26/01: Chips on the Dips?
02/23/01: How Tauzin Can Keep His Word And Stop Telecom "Remonopolization"
02/13/01: Consumers, WAKE UP! Middlemen are ripping you off
02/02/01: Publicity-Seeking Politicians and Contingency-Fee Lawyers Corrupt the Law
01/26/01: DoubleClick, eBay And Their Promising Ilk
01/24/01: Will Cyberspace Look Like France or America?
12/27/00: Cut interest, taxes and regulation to save high-tech economy
12/20/00: Close, But No Big Czar
12/15/00: A Down Year? Maybe. But Letís Put It in Perspective
12/13/00: Clintonís sorry midnight race into history
12/07/00: Is Telecomís Future The Bells, The Bells, and Only The Bells?
12/01/00: Money talks and walks in election aftermath
11/29/00: Climate Treaty Deadlock Shows Lack of Consensus and Common Sense
11/23/00: Climate change participants donít listen to reasons for uncertainty
11/21/00: Will Regulators Create a Recession?
11/14/00: The Election and the Market
10/26/00: Hang on for the long term
10/25/00: On privacy, one size doesnít fit all
10/24/00: Perish the bearish thought
10/19/00: Beating hunger --- the biggest prize
10/13/00: Way to play biotech
10/12/00: Bush vs. Gore on Technology
10/11/00: Global Climate Scare: Fools Rush In
10/05/00: Avoid the Apple Trap
10/03/00: Goodbye, anti-Microsoft crusader --- and good riddance
09/29/00: Should You Invest in Tech IPOs?
09/27/00: Could technology end airline delays?
09/22/00: Donít Forget Small Caps
09/20/00: Is the New York Times Rooting for Disaster?
09/13/00: The Best Argument Against Net Regulation
08/30/00: Political Risk in Big Drug Stocks
07/27/00: Tech Dividends
07/25/00: Government Privacy Violators
07/20/00: If I Had to Pick One Tech Stock
07/18/00: Our Favorite Lawsuit
07/13/00: Silicon Valley East
07/11/00: Election 2000: Year of the Investor Class?
07/07/00: Adventures on the Amazon.com
07/06/00:The Difference Between Bill Gates and Larry Ellison
06/29/00: In the Chips
06/27/00: Free market wins in Federal Court!
06/22/00: Wireless Bargains?
06/20/00: Is Your SUV Warming the Planet?
06/15/00: Shopping for Government
06/13/00: Top 10 Tech Stocks
06/08/00: Riding the eBook Wave
06/06/00: "The Last Mile"
06/02/00: Keep Buying!
05/31/00: Who Asked the FTC to Regulate Online Privacy?
05/25/00: "When Itís Time to Sell"
05/23/00: End the "Telephone Tax"
05/16/00: Time Warner Gets a Bad Rap
© 2002, Tech Central Station