I think all of the above.Liquidity (in dollar terms, which is...

I think all of the above.

Liquidity (in dollar terms, which is what really matters) is number of shares traded multiplied by price per share. So there's two answers to higher liquidity... more shares traded or higher price per share. So a higher share price by itself will increase liquidity, but it would also no doubt loosen some shares from sticky hands and increase the pool available for sale.

If RAC was trading at $15 per share, even maintaining current volume, typical daily turnover would be in the $2.5 million to $5 million dollar range, which would be more respectable from a large investor perspective. Remember, institutions are managing a dollar value of portfolio, not looking for a particular number of shares to hold. One of their criteria for investment is likely to be "how easily can I buy or sell $x million of stock".

So what is going to give us a higher share price? Buyers who are less price sensitive i.e. are concerned less about the price they are paying for RAC shares and more concerned with the what RACs price will be in the future. These kinds of buyers unfortunately are more likely to be institutional, traders and FOMOs. No doubt solid value-adding news would help in attracting this type of attention.

One of the downsides to retail investors is that (I think anyway) they tend to look at where the price has been, not where it is going, and may consequently feel that RAC is expensive given its recent history. Obviously the well informed retail investors we know are an exception to this rule, but they also probably have limited firepower left in terms of impacting share price at this level, and in any case would also trying to maximise the number of RAC they hold which reduces their incentive to try and bid up the price.