Share Split Survey



  • If I'm correct, it means if you currently hold 100 shares at £5 each, you would NOW have 200 shares at £2.50 each. It makes profit/loss a lot more volatile/exciting 🙈. The dividends would be halved thus allowing more than just the 3 places on media days / 5 places on match days. Am I right? 🤔



  • It seems 1 thing has come from this... confusion..



  • @NewUser181637

    No. The dividends halving means that in the example you give, a 5p payout will be worth 2.5p.

    The only benefit is if: (a) FI decide to round up fractions to the nearest whole penny (thus creating a slight dividend increase); or, (b) people plough more money into players because they look cheaper than before (thus increasing the value of your portfolio).



  • I don't think they can do anything with results of this survey because it seems a large part of the user base doesn't understand a share split, making the results worthless because people don't know what their voting for.

    To clear it up. If you vote for the split, there will be a extra 350 million a week for the NHS.



  • @Johar said in Share Split Survey:

    @johnboywalker

    Is it clear? Or are they just trying to find out what their clients think about one of the most talked about options at the moment?

    If they were shitting it surely they'd just do it and not ask.

    So for the first time in about 10 days, my portfolio started going green about 20 mins ago.

    I guess that email did the trick.



  • @Misto

    Plus if we vote for the share split, the economy will collapse and everyone will be unemployed.



  • @ocs123 said in Share Split Survey:

    @Misto

    Plus if we vote for the share split, the economy will collapse and everyone will be unemployed.

    A share split means we will have to have to introduce our own currency.

    Buying a Kit Kat at the local shops will reportedly cost you 142 footsies ...



  • Well I've given it the thumbs up. What the hell!



  • I never got a survey! Boo!



  • As already pointed out the dividends would likely divide / split by the same amount.

    I believe in the early days of FI there was only media buzz at 20p a share for each winner, they then did a 4 way split, so if you had 100 of Pogba you now have 400 but each time you won you'd get 5p a share (this was how it was when I joined) So essentially everyday Pogba wins you'd still get the same payout because you have 4 times more.

    The major advantage however is that now Pogba instead of being £12 a share is £3 a share = much more attractive for new users. And when his price increases to £3.01 your portfolio goes up £4 (as you now have 400)

    So from what I understand it really benefits the established traders but doesn't particularly harm new users, because if a new user today pays £12 a share for Pogba and earns 10% in buzz (i.e. £1.20 a share) in the future they'd pay £3 they'd still get the same 10% return only now it's 30p a share.

    If the prices then rose back to where 1 share in Pogba was not getting such a good return %, FI would probably then look at increasing dividends again (as they did in the past with the introduction of PB payouts) but this would then be a question of financial viability for FI.....



  • There's no mention of rounding dividends up!



  • Look, the news alone means that the market is bouncing back! As mentioned above those that are in one the big boys when the share split occurs should reap collective benefit of the less financially able being able to invest in Messi, Pogba et al.

    i.e

    Trader A has 100 Poggers @12.80

    It splits into 200 Poggers @6.40

    Everyone piles in for some Poggers action that they couldn't afford before?



  • The only problem I have with it is the fact the dividends per share would become pretty small. Obviously there is no real reduction in the value of dividends per share, but would some potential new investors think it was worthwhile seeing a dividend return of 6p or less per share? (assuming they did a 1:2 share split therefore treble PB became 6p per share).



  • It seems this has confused plenty of people and AT10 post is spot on.

    To make things clear increasing dividends is not being discussed here that will not happen until FI deem it financially viable to do so based upon revenue coming in.

    Share splits are just a perception thing to hopefully increase turnover. By making the top players look cheaper they are hoping new traders will buy them as they may be deemed too expensive otherwise. In reality nothing has changed as the dividends are reduced pro rata.

    In my opinion all existing traders should be in favour as we are all already holding futures in players that will look cheaper to new traders. Then as FI grows so will our profits.



  • If dividends stayed the same then we would effectively be doubling them and essence doubling the true value of your portfolio. If they were doing that a survey would be pointless as noone in their right mind would vote against it.

    Assuming dividends are halved (so in real terms no change), we would probably see a big share price rise but it would be causing a pretty big bubble as players would not be worth the price.

    If it came in then I would probably rub my hands, take my profits and cash out after the initial surge. Certainly I would sell short term assets.



  • I have a small portfolio and cannot afford any of the top players.

    Id like to see the share split so I can finally hold some of the top players......



  • @mike778 One of my main worries right there. FI can do loads to help pump up a bubble. I would rather see sustainable growth and a long lasting platform to trade on.



  • @johnboywalker we could use ADV??? ;)



  • @Johar I think there will still be plenty of value for new users. But it's definitely better to think in %s. When I first joined I bought Pogba for around £4 a share, I calculated that he had to win MB 8 times in a whole year to return me 40p a share = 10% return. Let's say they do a 2x split - Pogba is now £6, MB is 2.5p a share, he'd have to win MB 24 times in a year to return 60p (10%) that's just 2 wins a month = still good value.

    Based on dividend return there will definitely be some who are not worth buying - but that's the same today.

    The problem is we're all currently seeing such great return %s from dividends we've perhaps become, dare I say, greedy? a 10% return whether 40p or £4 is still better for the average footy fan with a bit of disposable income than leaving it in a bank account earning nothing. A lot more fun too!!



  • @dannypea dividends wouldnt stay the same if a split was to occur imo


Log in to reply