r/s is never a good experience for existing shareholders

Bull. Can you honestly say that? Everyone likes to say that Nortel's failing SP is due to the RS. But the company was in trouble long before that happened. Nortel's RS was done to stop a bleed - in other words, it was done for exactly the wrong reasons. They attempted to attract more institutional investors, which did not work.

Spider is a junior company with a pile of shares outstanding. A 10:1 RS will reduce the number of outstanding shares to about 30 million. This makes the shares much more scarce, which should lead to smaller trading volume. This reduction in volume should detract the day traders, who act like vultures when they see a penny stock averaging a million shares a day. This should keep the SP steady.

On the flip side, a news release will attract more buyers. With fewer shares available, the SP should actually see gains upon release of a NR such as our early May one.

Now, wouldn't that be nice?

Don't forget, the vote is to allow for a RS, not to commit one. IF NN et al believe that a RS is needed in order to prop up the SP for a PP, or to detract from ludicrous day trading, then it is a tool they can use. Ultimately, the best method of reducing shares is for the company to buy them back, but that is something that SPQ and other exploration companies can ill afford to do - money is best spent on drilling.

Yesterday, I posted this message. You should educate yourself a little by reading the link within that talks about reverse shares. Then you will have a better view on RS, and maybe understand what the directors are trying to do - run the company in the best interest of its current shareholders.