I am wondering if there is any interest for a company to make statements or to act in any manner such that would make investors refrain from investing in their shares?

Take Nintendo recent statement that Pokemon GO earnnings will have a limited affect on Nintendo earnning. This statement was clearly meant to chill the craze around their stock which was doubling itself at that time. So why would they want to chill their investors and block the raise of their own stock price?

  • Hypothetical. Could there ever be such a case? I can't think of one but I wouldn't swear there wasn't. – keshlam Jul 26 '16 at 14:38
  • Stock splits are a company intentionally lowering it's share price. – Chris Jul 27 '16 at 12:56

I'm sure Nintendo made that statement to stem what will clearly be an upset during the next quarterly report. This statement was simply a reminder to investors to avoid the stick price climbing ever higher only to crash when the financial situation of the company isn't significantly different from the prior quarter.

This is just spelling out the reality of Nintendo's involvement with the Pokemon brand and Pokemon Go game and the fact that the games release and associated income was already included in the guidance released last quarter. Nintendo's stock has just about doubled and there likely won't be associated income to support that come the quarterly report.

  • So their motives are purely care for their investors money? – Ofek Ron Jul 26 '16 at 15:02
  • 3
    @OfekRon no. A stock price crash can hurt confidence in the company, and it may affect its image, its ability to acquire cheap credit, its ability to create partnerships, sales of future products, and several other factors. Companies are kind of sociopathical, they don't care about anyone but themselves. – Mindwin Jul 26 '16 at 15:11
  • @Mindwin The investors ultimately are the corporation. Corporate fraud generally involves one of two things: (1) individuals within the corporation acting fraudulently for their own gains [ie: attempting to manipulate earnings to impact their bonus compensation]; or (2) defrauding an external party. The corporation itself does not benefit from defrauding its investors, although a CEO might. This difference is critical to understanding what a corporation is, and how it needs to be viewed in society. – Grade 'Eh' Bacon Aug 22 '16 at 17:05
  • @Grade'Eh'Bacon unless the investors are the decision makers, they are just stakeholders. And it is not just the decision-making at the next shareholder's assembly vote; I mean day-to-day decision-making. But you are right in the Corporation does not commit fraud. People commit fraud. Even though the company may be punished at the court, it does not have the ability to think for itself. – Mindwin Aug 22 '16 at 18:36

Are you really talking about share price, or share value?

Because what about stock splits? Market Cap stays the same, but the price per share is lowered. This is so that the stock is more liquid and accessible to a greater number of investors. This encourages people to invest in the stock though.

I can't really think of any reasons why a company would want to lower their share value or discourage people from investing unless they are trying to reacquire shares. Returning value to the shareholders is the #1 priority of any publicly traded company.


Not directly Nintendo, but: A company would want its share price to be high if it wants to sell its stock, e.g. on IPO or on subsequent offerings.

However, if they want to buy back some shares, it would be in their interest to get more stock for the buck.

There may of course be derivative values associated with a high share price, e.g. if they bet on the price or have agreements with investors for particular milestones to be reached.

Employees might hold shares and be motivated by share price increases, so a decrease may not be desired, unless they are into some kind of insider trading (buy low, sell high).

And last, over-valued share prices may undermine trust in a company, and failing to inform shareholders sufficiently may be outright illegal.

Besides those reasons related to law, funding, sales, public relations and company image, companies should be pretty much independent from their own share prices, in contrast to share distribution.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.