The "no" voters are acting on the premise that reverse splits are largely unsuccessful and leave the investor with less than they started. Being that mining stocks are considered to be successful between 1 &3 out of 1000 times in terms of becoming a mine, one might equally assume that reverse splits are somewhat proportional to this in success rate. However, having made the above comments, I would assume at this point that most investors are fairly certain that SPQ has the goods to become a mine, at least in concert with the other plays, therefore why wouldn't they assume this experienced management, who will be taking this stock to home base, has the insight to know if and when a reverse split would be a powerful tool. The split is exactly that, a tool to accomplish a certain set of objectives. The problem is that people don't know what these objectives are. I was contemplating what a particular stock (won't mention what it is) will do when a strike is made and demand is made on only 10 mil shares outstanding. This would most certainly create a massive upward surge on the sp and an opportunity, if needed, to acquire greater funding. What would happen under the same circumstances with SPQ's 300mil plus outstanding shares? I personally believe that management is in the position to make the best judgement, knowing who is on the team, who their affiliates are and the land they have already proven to be valuable in an area ever increasing in strikes. I believe they will use a split to propel this stock to new highs.