TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

How the decimation of the IPO market has hurt the economy and worse

70 点作者 hbhakhra超过 9 年前

11 条评论

hbhakhra超过 9 年前
Mark Cuban is an interesting character. I originally viewed him as the goofy owner of the Dallas Mavericks but now that I&#x27;ve seen some of his talks and blog posts as well Shark Tank, I am really beginning to appreciate his business sense.<p>300 of 330 employees becoming millionaires within a year of IPO. With the amount of dilution most startups go through after the multiple rounds, this is an unimaginable outcome nowadays.
评论 #11040040 未加载
nugget超过 9 年前
As an investor I am familiar with often-cited data that shows how small and mid cap stocks have traditionally outperformed large cap stocks over time. I wonder if this cherry picking of returns whereby the fastest growing small companies leapfrog the public capital markets completely and only go public once they&#x27;ve captured the majority of returns will impact this historical trend.
sjg007超过 9 年前
I think Cuban is spot on in his assessment. It&#x27;s basically not worth it unless you can find a secondary market buyer. Feels like musical chairs. And whatever you can&#x27;t sell, with preferred shares outstanding, makes it seem like all bets are off, unless you can IPO which at least gives you a chance.
aaronbrethorst超过 9 年前
Strangely, the word &quot;revenue&quot; is not mentioned in that blog post once. Does anyone know if Broadcast.com ever made a meaningful amount of money before Yahoo! acquired them for $5.7 billion(!)?
评论 #11039363 未加载
csense超过 9 年前
I somehow missed the headbar, it wasn&#x27;t until I got to these comments that I realized the author was Mark Cuban.<p>I thought he was spot-on even before I knew who he was.<p>I think one of the big problems is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act implemented after the fall of Enron due to accounting problems. We wanted to make sure that there were no IPO&#x27;s defrauding the public, but the regulations went too far and made sure there were no (or very few) IPO&#x27;s, period.<p>And the IPO&#x27;s that do happen are much much bigger. This is bad because much of the wealth that&#x27;s created by a new company is created during its growth phase. In the 1900&#x27;s, you could have simply <i>bought</i> shares in the young Microsoft or the young Apple -- at least there was a chance for some of that wealth went to regular folks who invested in the stock market. In the 2000&#x27;s, the young Google and the young Facebook were only accessible to the rich -- VC firms and accredited investors with the right connections.<p>This isn&#x27;t just bad for regular investors, it&#x27;s bad for companies too. A public market has a lot more counterparties and is more competitive -- so (in theory at least) a publicly traded company shouldn&#x27;t have to give up as much equity to raise a fixed amount of cash (because rather than being limited to making offers to a few private investors, there&#x27;s a continuous bidding war for the stock in which pretty much anyone can be a buyer).
lkrubner超过 9 年前
The reliance on the stock markets is mostly a phenomena of the English speaking countries. It is supported by aspects of law, some of which go back to English Common Law, and most of which were shaped by the evolution of that law during the 20th century, especially as the law related to debt, fraud, and financial transparency.<p>Most developed countries take a different approach. In both Germany and France, and also in Japan, it is common for businesses to rely on close relationships with banks to get the financing they need.<p>Because of all this, I object to the tone of this paragraph, which makes it sound as if there is no way forward for business, except for the stock market:<p>&quot;Why take it public ? Because the stock market was a source of cash that could help you grow. It was a marketing and validation opportunity that told customers and prospects you had arrived. It was a liquidity opportunity that while not guaranteed, if you could continue to grow the company over the long haul, would value your company at a multiple of earnings and allow me, my investors (many who were close friends) and my employees to increase our net-worth and cash holdings.&quot;<p>There is an alternate way to interpret the changes of law and finance during the last 25 years: that the USA is converging toward a model that has similarities to that used in other developed countries. There is nothing wrong with this trend. There may a lot of positives to this trend. Merely focusing on the end of the old system by no means proves that the new system is bad.
评论 #11039757 未加载
评论 #11039948 未加载
评论 #11039931 未加载
评论 #11039787 未加载
tomc1985超过 9 年前
I&#x27;m not sure I agree with his &quot;dead money&quot; assessment... if its parked in a bank it is still providing money to the bank, which can be doled out in loans.
评论 #11039961 未加载
评论 #11039376 未加载
jostmey超过 9 年前
It only seems bad to those in business of pushing out IPOs. To everyone else, it appears as a market correction.
ojbyrne超过 9 年前
This is like saying that the decimation of the housing bubble has hurt the economy and worse. Broadcast.com is the classic example of a completely worthless business flipped to a clueless buyer.
pitt1980超过 9 年前
if a founder was recruiting you as an employee, and told you their strategy was to shoot for an IPO instead of shooting for an acquisition<p>would that have any tangible value to you as a prospective employee?
lowglow超过 9 年前
Can private companies not offer dividends to their stock holders?
评论 #11039700 未加载
评论 #11039225 未加载