BAK - Investing | Stock Discussion Forums

SiliconInvestor

sponsor

Sponsor

Strategies & Market Trends | BAK - Investing

Previous 10 | Next 10

To: XoFruitCake who wrote (2772)	5/23/2012 7:50:57 AM
From: Flipper2058	1 Recommendation of 3143

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Morgan Stanl The Underwriting process as not a clear as it always seems. Many orders for IPO's are written as favors. Brokers get full commission and the account can flip for pennies. It is a nice kiss for the brokers. There are many reasons orders are placed and they are not always to actually buy the firm. The term is "soft dollars". Many mutual funds get research etc...in return. It is just how it works and underwriters know this, FB execs do not. Having an order book 7 times over does not mean price the sucker until it is maxed. Most of the orders likely were below the range. Obviously NOW most were playing the game. Underwriters know this too with hot deals. And many orders are forced to be "market" or don't place your order. Clients will do anything to be a part of it. It is NEVER been public, how does anyone know what is real or not? The answer is they don't and a cushion (premium) needs to be built in. If the client doesn't like the price then they should sell less shares and THEY can take the risk of a higher price down the road. Pricing at the max is asking your new shareholders to take the risk. And this is not the way to build trust since they are outsiders, not insiders. FB bagged everyone. Clear and simple. THey will have to work 3 times harder and show 3 times better results to earn the trust back for a 100 P/E/....If Fuckerberg was smart he would publically apoligize for the pricing and say he will work as hard as he can to make sure his new shareholders are rewarded. Will he? Probably not...he makes money dancing on people's privacy rights and likely has many questionable morals IMHO. Bill Gates is the same cloth and now is trying to "buy his way into heaven" via given money away.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: RalphR who wrote (2773)	5/23/2012 8:05:33 AM
From: XoFruitCake	of 3143

Re: Apple You just sitting on the sidelines for a while? I think I can sketch out a few scenario for China. Most of them involve lower inflation and interest rate cut. But I cannot see a reasonable solution coming out of Europe. I am not sure I worry about Greece leaving or staying in Euro. The problem is bank run in the troubled countries like Spain, Italy and Portugal. It will create more economic slowdown than anything else that I can think of.. Market seems to be not concern or handicapping a easy solution some how. Since I cannot figure what that solution is, I just sit on my income stuff for now (and may be selling down some MREIT stuff but holding on everything else) and play the Iphone 5 derby later on this year.. Almost everything that I look at now are driven by the macro situation. I don't see any company with business strong enough that can do well with a chaotic Europe and a stagnate China (even if China cut rate, I don't think they can replace the construction slow down. Rail construction in China is done for a while, they can't borrow money. Government is still clamping down Residential RE. Local government construction, land sales, and spending are all stuck)

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: Flipper2058 who wrote (2774)	5/23/2012 8:17:46 AM
From: XoFruitCake	of 3143

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Mo You are getting your answer now. The bad press is brutal and you killed your trust with your buyers. YOU want to be the guy that buys at the top tick? Funds SAY they are long term but would you want an instant loss or a gain? If you have low priced shares would you be likely to add later? Probably... heh heh. if they have another IPO in the near future then yes, definitely they will be impacted.. But if FB miraculously announce a good quarter, all will be forgiven. Just think about the crash that AMZN went throught when the internet bubble bursted back in 2001-2002. The stock crash and burned then and it is rising like phoenix rightnow. The group that loss client confidence are MS and NASDA. FB as a company is really not the problem here (me think). If FB trys to sell more stock traders are going to short the hell out it before hand and give them a lower price for fear of a busted deal. You would too.... If their business performance is same-mo same-mo. I would agree with you. However, if their business performance is doing much better and stock price move up with some momentum, it should be easy for them to do another IPO (but as you suggested, they probably need to switch underwriter). Fund manager is like everyone else, if they think company is going to do well in the future and can make them money, they will pound on it. Just looked at how many discussion we had on CHK. Management burned investors so many times, but yet we still attracted to the stock if the price is right

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read \| Read Replies (2)

To: XoFruitCake who wrote (2772)	5/23/2012 9:54:39 AM
From: cfimx	of 3143

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Morgan Stanl that's true. but goog also began life as a public company significantly undervalued, not overvalued like FB. goog went public via a dutch auction, which does not seek to extract the top dollar from the public. And if you recall there was a lot of confusion about how to value goog at that time. that's partly why the stock is up 7 fold. Msft has had fantastic earnings growth since 2000. but's it's stock has gone nowhere. why? because in 2000 it was way overvalued. FB is in the same boat. It has to have significant growth in EPS just to justify the current price. And it's business is already decelerating.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: XoFruitCake who wrote (2767)	5/23/2012 10:07:59 AM
From: Spekulatius	of 3143

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Mo >>MS represent the seller well (selling more at a higher price) but taking all the IPO buyers out for a ride and they will pay for their dirty deed for years to come..<< Stupid question (maybe) but is MS representing the seller (Facebook and it's investor's) or both the sellers and buyers in this IPO.? I always thought they represent the seller although in the past they were representing themselves and earning extra free money via the greenshoes and the kickbacks from their customers (extra commission business) that are thankful for getting in at a low offering price. I do think that selective information releases are a problem but the SEC disclosure takes wind out of that one too.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: cfimx who wrote (2783)	5/23/2012 10:09:07 AM
From: Flipper2058	1 Recommendation of 3143

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Morgan Stanl IMHO, selling FB as a public firm is vastly different then if it is sold in total as a private firm. FB would be worth half it's multiple at best. IMHO, the critical part of being public is doing what is best for all your shareholders...which in the end will mean it will do best for yourself. You can not expect to bag shareholders with your $.10 cost basis stock and expect them to trust you and thus command a huge multiple. Fool them once shame on you, fool them twice....blah blah... Wall Street sees plenty of crooks. Finding non-crooked CEO's is more rare then normal...too bad. 421m shares now overhead in cost....

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read \| Read Replies (1)

Previous 10 | Next 10

Copyright/IP Policy

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.