BAK - Investing | Stock Discussion Forums

Strategies & Market Trends | BAK - Investing

To: XoFruitCake who wrote (2772)	5/23/2012 9:54:39 AM
From: cfimx	of 3144

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 3144

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 3144

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)

To: Flipper2058 who wrote (2775)	5/23/2012 2:12:23 PM
From: DoggyDogWorld	7 Recommendations of 3144

Re: re FB - interesting to see so much blame for the FB IPO but is Morgan Stanl The 2 GOOG founders TRIED to do a Dutch Auction aorund $120, it was a flop. ........ So the $120 range was reduced and the 2 founders thankfully opted to wash their hands of it and let the underwriters do their job. You make it sound like the Dutch Auction failed so GOOG let the underwriters run a traditional IPO. That's not at all what happened. GOOG's original price range was 108-135. But Nasdaq dropped 12% in the weeks leading up to the IPO and GOOG's founders did some dumb things (e.g. the infamous quiet period Playboy interview). Instead of pulling the IPO they dropped the price range to 80-95. Of course traditional underwriters drop IPO prices all the time in tough markets. GOOG still did a Dutch Auction, though, they did not "wash their hands of it" and let the underwriters and their cronies run a traditional rigged IPO. Well a Dutch Auction means the top bidders get stock....so when it starts trading who is left to pay higher? No one, obviously. Your logic makes no sense. Billions of shares are auctioned to top bidders every day from 8:30am-4:00pm on the floor of the NYSE. There are no shortage of buyers. Dutch Auction means top bidders get stock, but at the lowest clearing price. Buyers who bid 50 but get filled at a clearing price of 40 might would quite rationally buy more at 42-45 once trading starts. In fact, Dutch Auction virtually ensures some buying pressure when the stock opens. GOOG went one step further. Instead of filling the top X bidders at the clearing price, they pro-rated everyone and lowered the clearing price from 98-ish to 85. This guaranteed a pop at the open. You can gift cash to your IPO buyers just as easily with a Dutch Auction as a traditional IPO. Dutch simply gives you the potential to eliminate the cronyism and corruption that permeates traditional IPOs. Bottom line: GOOG's Dutch Auction succeeded and FB's traditional IPO failed. I understand why you like the old IPO process. You've made a great living off it, you understand it and "that's how it's always been done". But the traditional IPO order book process is a throwback to the days of ticker machines and paper stock certificates. Like T+3 settlement, it's no longer appropriate and causes more problems than it solves. We should have cleaned up this anachronistic cesspool a long time ago.

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

To: Covenant who wrote (2759)

5/23/2012 7:33:35 PM

From: Covenant

of 3144

Re: Two Buck Chuck pricing steady for last week

Trade Date Delivery Start Date Delivery End Date High Low Wtd Avg Index Volume (mmBtu)

May 23, 2012	May 24, 2012	May 24, 2012	$2.6275	$2.5750	$2.6015	673,200
May 22, 2012	May 23, 2012	May 23, 2012	$2.6500	$2.5250	$2.5500	557,400
May 21, 2012	May 22, 2012	May 22, 2012	$2.6200	$2.5700	$2.5985	460,100
May 18, 2012	May 19, 2012	May 21, 2012	$2.6050	$2.5200	$2.5638	800,200
May 17, 2012	May 18, 2012	May 18, 2012	$2.6375	$2.4800	$2.6054	941,300
May 16, 2012	May 17, 2012	May 17, 2012	$2.5375	$2.4625	$2.4997	698,800
May 15, 2012	May 16, 2012	May 16, 2012	$2.4600	$2.3300	$2.3806	706,000
May 14, 2012	May 15, 2012	May 15, 2012	$2.4300	$2.3900	$2.4066	626,900
May 11, 2012	May 12, 2012	May 14, 2012	$2.4300	$2.2925	$2.3676	913,300
May 10, 2012	May 11, 2012	May 11, 2012	$2.4000	$2.2800	$2.3583	738,400
May 9, 2012	May 10, 2012	May 10, 2012	$2.4000	$2.3350	$2.3602	813,900
May 8, 2012	May 9, 2012	May 9, 2012	$2.3000	$2.2400	$2.2682	719,200
May 7, 2012	May 8, 2012	May 8, 2012	$2.3200	$2.2750	$2.3010	738,800
May 4, 2012	May 5, 2012	May 7, 2012	$2.3300	$2.2450	$2.3038	1,033,900
May 3, 2012	May 4, 2012	May 4, 2012	$2.3275	$2.2600	$2.2855	890,300
May 2, 2012	May 3, 2012	May 3, 2012	$2.3250	$2.2500	$2.3093	583,400
May 1, 2012	May 2, 2012	May 2, 2012	$2.3150	$2.2600	$2.2860	594,900
Apr 30, 2012	May 1, 2012	May 1, 2012	$2.1425	$2.0775	$2.0961	639,700
Apr 27, 2012	Apr 28, 2012	Apr 30, 2012	$2.1000	$1.9600	$2.0450	787,600
Apr 26, 2012	Apr 27, 2012	Apr 27, 2012	$2.1450	$2.0200	$2.1019	793,200
Apr 25, 2012	Apr 26, 2012	Apr 26, 2012	$2.0300	$1.9650	$1.9935	889,600
Apr 24, 2012	Apr 25, 2012	Apr 25, 2012	$2.0100	$1.9500	$1.9739	661,200
Apr 23, 2012	Apr 24, 2012	Apr 24, 2012	$1.9775	$1.8625	$1.8873	781,600
Apr 20, 2012	Apr 21, 2012	Apr 23, 2012	$1.9050	$1.7975	$1.8198	879,200
Apr 19, 2012	Apr 20, 2012	Apr 20, 2012	$1.8675	$1.7950	$1.8523	754,700
Apr 18, 2012	Apr 19, 2012	Apr 19, 2012	$1.8875	$1.8300	$1.8650	639,200
Apr 17, 2012	Apr 18, 2012	Apr 18, 2012	$1.9050	$1.8550	$1.8897	685,200
Apr 16, 2012	Apr 17, 2012	Apr 17, 2012	$1.9050	$1.8650	$1.8792	833,700
Apr 13, 2012	Apr 14, 2012	Apr 16, 2012	$1.9250	$1.8300	$1.8662	1,101,400
Apr 12, 2012	Apr 13, 2012	Apr 13, 2012	$1.9200	$1.8550	$1.8733	1,124,600
Apr 11, 2012	Apr 12, 2012	Apr 12, 2012	$1.9400	$1.8800	$1.9085	1,132,800
Includes all firm physical fixed price trades done from 7 AM to 11:30 AM Central Prevailing Time on the trade date specified for natural gas delivered on the specified date(s).

Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

Previous 10 | Next 10