Originally Posted by AppleStud
You claim to be a shareholder, so I'm curious why you would want the stock to split. You do realize how stock splits work, right? Double the shares, but half the value per share. You're right back where you started, except now the stock is cheaper and there's more volatility. Ask Google or Berkshire Hathaway about stock splitting. Sorry to hear whatever mental block you have which makes you think two $100 shares is somehow better than one $200 share.
It's not my mental block, but conventional wisdom says that the market likes to see more "affordable" stock and that there's a sweet spot for the equity in question. Anyhow, please look at other replies to your comment.
I purchased my shares just before Apple split the stock the last time and they seem to have done quite nicely. Apple has not backed away from splitting shares, but it looks like they have chosen to move to a higher price window.
It is curious that you mentioned Google and Berkshire Hathaway, as I own shares in both of those companies as well.
I don't actually know what Google's stance on stock splits is; no one outside of Google does because they won't comment on it. I bought around 300 and they are trading near 600. In any case, my ROI on Google is nothing like my ROI on Apple.
I will also mention that if you are a Berkshire Hathaway shareholder of Class B stock, you should have recently received a proxy ballot: the board is proposing a 50-to-1 split of the Class B shares.
There are several reasons why Berkshire Hathaway wants to split the Class B shares. One reason stated by Warren himself was to give small fry investors of Burlington Northern (pending acquisition target and S&P 500 component) a piece of Berkshire Hathaway. Naturally, this affordability would affect any retail investor. This drives up trading volume and makes Berkshire Hathaway a more convincing candidate to be on the S&P 500 itself. That would force index funds to add shares which would also increase trading traffic.