More doom and gloom. Now back below original listed price http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/laugh1.gif

$25 [in six weeks] won't seem too far-fetched I tell ya http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/cool1.gif

An IPO is designed to make as much capital as possible for the company, 90% of these shares went to corporate investors. Of course the price will drop a bit, but then it will go up and down, the same as any company on the stock market. You could at least do some basic research before laughing about it.

Woody woodpecker laugh.


I won't be surprised to see FB drop down to what it really is... a $5b-$10b company. Maybe they keep rolling snake eyes, but I doubt it, as their popularity is not based on technical achievement or any real wow factor, but on being less annoying than the other guys. That is a terrible thing to be popular for when you go public. Maybe the users won't get annoyed at all the new attempts at revenue growth that are forthcoming, but it would sure be nice to have a technical or wow factor advantage... instead of only being less annoying.

They aren't doing Zynga any favors lately.

I'd be inclined to discuss it further with you if you didn't sound so bitter. Did Zuckerberg rip of your idea or something?

Stocks go up and down, but overall they can still go in a downward direction.


Down 11% right now. Makes me laugh a little.

What is FB's plan anyway? Hopefully not just take advantage of their users. Im already on the fritz with FB. If they do anything else that is stupid I will have my wife shut down her account. If all FB is going to do is take advantage of their users, yeah...

Who is bitter? What is wrong with a $5-$10B company? It sounds as if you are the one burned by this IPO, not me. I never expected the IPO to do well. It hasn't. And no one but you is whining about it.

I think as a 5-10b company FB has a long future. As a 100b company, that future is much shorter, imo. What do you think? Oh, that is right... you have no opinion, other than whining.

Can anyone read this without a Nicki Minaj blink?

A kindergarden explanation of Facebook's IPO performance, but decent enough for what it is. Basically any joblow that invested in FB on day one is a total retard. I explained to a few of my friends why it was a bad idea to invest immediately, but they didn't listen. FB still lacks an adequate ad revenue stream to be even remotely competitive with Google, but I foresee them improving that over the years. $100B company this was never intended to be, but given the right leadership they could be one day. As it stands FB is not a miracle IPO, and one should take the same precautions investing in it as they would with any other company.

LinkedIn's price collapsed within a few weeks of the IPO (more than 20%), but is now above the IPO price - and it launched against a backdrop of an overall market rise. For institutional clients, day 1, day 2 or even day 30 isn't the main concern. Day 5,000 and beyond is where they're looking.

Interesting article explaining why Facebook's bubble is about to burst.....

http://www.technologyreview.com/web/...iYCrlo.twitter

Down to $31, also regulators are getting involved: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84L0PE20120522

More doom and gloom http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/cool1.gif

Yes, awesome... I really wanted to work this weekend. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo.../rolleyes1.gif

Was it you that caused this? You didn't revise your estimate and just tell the 1% did you? If a bookie did that, it would be illegal. Investment banker/underwriter, not so much.

You don't know the half of it.

This is about 98% accurate though...

edit... FM's profanity filter messes up the URL...

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/05/how-facebook-f u c k e d-up-its-own-ipo/

Take out the spaces.

http://www.economonitor.com/blog/201...p-its-own-ipo/ this works too, i think.. is it the same?

Since MS was the main underwriter, got any figures how much they're down since holding up the price on Friday?

Yes, same one - but they cleaned up some of the language.

In dollar terms, none - let's say (combined) the underwriters stumped up $500m on Friday to carry the stock, then dumped it Monday at $32 - the losses were lower than the revenue on the IPO itself and the trades (net/net maybe $90m or so).

The reputational damage, and cost to the organizations to get picked apart by FINRA... that's a different matter.

So say, underwriters got the stock at $25, sold it at first for $38-42, and then when they had sold their allotment, dipped into reserve stock at current price (~38/39) to support the price? I have read the reserves came into play, is that above how?

I feel that article under-values the benefit of online advertising for smaller businesses. Without Google Adwords, I would be out of business, and would have never been able to grow the company I have today. The yellow pages are obsolete, and media-based advertising was (and still is) impossibly expensive for anything less than deep pocketed companies. The problem is that FB does not have an innovative (or even efficient) strategy of implementing their paid-for advertising using their medium. The ads are cumbersome, cluttered, and barely reach the target market. And that doesn't bode too well for a company who's main source of revenue is online advertising.

--deleted--

Greenshoe Option... http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/cool1.gif