One instance where quantiy over quality is a good thing (part one)

What's an investment strategy that seems to go over the heads of most investors? The concept that investing is more about how many shares you own, less about how much they are worth.

For example: having one share at $100/share rise $10 is all well and dandy. But, if you have 10 shares at $10/share($100 value) rising $2/share...you end up profiting more for a lot less work.

110(or 100+10) < 120 (or [10*10]+[10*2])

If you've  invested much at all you know how easy it is for the $20 gain to be negligible (mainly due to commissions on the buy and sell execution). As you raise the scaling of the amount of shares, say quadruple it, the playing field alters dramatically. Quadrupling the shares (putting each at a value of $400) would increase the marginal difference to $40. And so on and so on until you reach a scale that will effectively render the higher stock price useless.

As an investor in the market, many of you know how easy it is for a lower priced stock to jump $2; and how hard it is for a higher priced stock to jump $10. Don't worry my point is coming up.

The reason for this illustration was to show how even with an unrealistic advantage (jumping $10 while lower price only jumps $2); the scenario where lower share prices are involved generally procure more earnings, even at a lower dollar return.

(part deux coming soon)