# Seems like 900 moves 1p

• So the confirmation from Tom on twitter was a load of porkies, it's obviously 900 futures to move a price up or down 1p, for anyone that's doubting this, put 300 +300+300 on the market just to test and see when the price goes down, there is a possibility that you put 300 after someone else just put 600 which will give you false readings, my question now is, will this be just for today or is this the set amount??

• Does this mean they're taking loads of our money and not giving us the rewards?

• @LuaLua
The same would apply for prices reducing

• @Advinculas-Index Lol forgot that. Altho i see no red atm :)

• Don't think it was Tom on Twitter (do you mean Dan N?) but Mike B and Adam C also hinted it would be 300 on FITV.

No matter, it should be ~900 - and it looks like they've got that right, thankfully.

• Looks like 900 to me, not good when we were expecting 300 to raise 1p. I think that has just shot capital appreciation to bits unless you are on an absolute flyer

• @Keegans-Bluff I would not to start another bun-fight on this subject Mr. Bluff but I genuinely don’t follow why 900 is correct. Could you please help me out with that so my brain can stop hurting. Thanks! 😊

• This post is deleted!

• @Le-Blanc no problem. Here is perhaps the simplest way of illustrating it that I've seen. From @BuzzingPaul

"A move from 99p to £1.02 pre split costs £300.

100 @ 99p
100 @ 100p
100 @ 101p

A move from 33p to 34p post split costs £297.

900 @ 33p"

• @Le-Blanc Lol its dark maths because you can write a simple statement that makes both true

## if someone IPO at 90 p... you are the only buyer and you buy 300 shares (pre split) you now own 300 @ 93p, post split you own 900 @31p, and his new IPO threshold is 30p. So sell your 900 shares and he is back to his IPO value of 30p … cos 900 sells = -1p

Share split by 3... everything multiplies or divides by 3... so it took 100 shares to move 1p it should now take 300 shares.

Which statement is true? Lol.

• @Keegans-Bluff @Vespasian32 I see....I think. 😂😂😂. Anyway it is what it is now let’s crack on!

• I've told everyone previously... It's different buckets for different price ranges.

The delta is not fixed - so it's a waste of time trying to work it out.

• my biggest concern is how it will impact the growing part of the market... match day flips. When it wont be so easy or so quick to get in and out on goalscorers etc.

pre split if Vardy was £1... he could shoot to £1.10 with 1000 shares bought costing £1050, now it will be 9000 shares costing £3447 to move him 10p

• Also the sell queues will be stacked before it's even noticeable to us that a player is losing desireability.

Going to have to suck it and see how this all pans out. We will know the true state of the market in about a month I suspect.

• I thought Adam hinted about this as the SS announcement . Different gaps for different price range players. They didn’t want 300 shares to effect a 50p they same as 300 would effect a £5 players.

• The more i think about 900=1p the more obvious it becomes, the futures are dividing by 3, but the shares are multiplying by 3, moving them in opposite directions to get back to pre split it'd have to be 3x3, which is obviously 900

• @Andy-M see @NewUser181606 post above & my post 👍

• @Andy-M Is it not possible that its 300p movement as of prices after 12 this afternoon however if a price drops below the price of a player upon market opening today then its 900p to prevent any negative value. Kind of like a threshold value to where price movement differs either side of to maintain growth but prevent invalud values
i dont hold enough shares to test this theory outlook
I reposted this here as i think j put it in the wrong thread earlier

• @Ericali It was always slightly more nuanced than 100 = 1p, but not enough that it really makes any significant practical difference. They seem to have transposed it correctly and that's all that matters.