In this episode, we talked about the stock split.  Dan and Nathaniel started the conversation by battling over who gives a better metaphor for the concept of a stock split (BTW, the editing team voted for Nathaniel).  Basically, you have one one-dollar bill, and after the stock split, you now have four quarters.  The price per unit has changed, but the value has not.  Then why do companies do stock splits?  Nathaniel explained that on one hand, it's a marketing tool to stimulate the market and give the illusion that the price is more buyable; and second, it gives small investors a chance to own a small piece of the company at a cheaper-per-unit price tag.  Dan talked about people's misconception in thinking that they get more value and more ownership due to the stock split.  The trio discussed a similar concept: some big custodians now offer the ability to purchase fractional shares of highly-liquid large companies.  You can buy, for instance, 1/10 of Berkshire Hathway Class A shares if you can't afford to buy a whole share.  Nathaniel likes the idea because he wanted to buy Berkshire's A-shares when he was 15 but didn't have the money, and the fractional shares' option would have given him a chance.  Dan and Tim, however, worry that this allows more non-professional retail traders to enter the market and create much more unnecessary price volatility.  Overall, in the short term, a stock split may create some buzz and the price may go up, but in the long term, the company value will not change because of a stock split.

P.S.: who's metaphor gets your vote?