this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
77 points (91.4% liked)
Technology
59261 readers
3698 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Now, I'm not as smart as the refined folk at the FT, but I think the word they are looking for is "merge", not "reverse split".
You'd think, but in fact that is what it's actually called in the financial world.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reversesplit.asp
Well don't I look foolish!
finance is full of that kind of terms that would even be goofy if they weren't that misleading.
when the economy contracts very often is called 'negative growth'.
It’s because broad adoption of the existing term -> fewer misunderstandings if you just use a variation. Anyone with even passing knowledge of stocks has heard of splitting. The inverse is so comparatively rare that the term wouldn’t be widespread enough to be as immediately understandable as the (admittedly dumb sounding) reverse split.
In part because stock merge could feasibly be multiple things. Stock share merge is more specific, but that’s three words that don’t flow very well rhythmically. A reverse split can only be one thing and is the most layman friendly.
Merge implies more than one company merging together to become one, which I'm guessing is why we have the term "reverse split"