Doesn't a reverse merger usually result in the original shareholders of the public company only receiving a fraction of their ownership in the new private company taking over, sometimes by as low as a factor of 10%?

i.e. if you had 500,000 shares in NTEK you may only get 50,000 shares of SWIG?

I remember reverse mergers being discussed on this board many months ago of which it seemed to carry a negative connotation.
I'd love to be corrected if otherwise. I just know some of us have already been burned by the reverse split and am curious as to what the true details and outcome of a reverse merger would potentially entail if people seem to think that is one possible option on the table.