Direct listings approved by SEC... how ****ed are the banks?
See WSJ article here.
Title: SEC Approves NYSE’s Plan for New IPO Alternative
Direct listings approved by SEC... how ****ed are the banks?
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
Career Resources
Maybe they could just stop drastically underpricing IPOs
Well I don’t think anyone would’ve priced DoorDash and AirBnb at the prices they opened at, they just aren’t worth their valuations. Almost impossible to predict.
That's part of the argument for a DL, it's basically an auction so there's much less prediction is involved. We all know a company's "fundamental value" is a nebulous concept, so letting people pay exactly how much they want for a stock for as much as they want is way better than piecing out an IPO to bank clients at poorly chosen prices and at much lower share counts than the longer-term holders would like. The VCs are obnoxious but I do think they're right about this one.
You're telling me every red neck in a trailer understands the covid premium when selling a used washer but the "best and brightest" in banking don't?
it's not a simplistic question of underpricing. the primary investors are largely long- term buy and hold oriented asset managers; they won't invest at crazy valuations but if the broad market is offering them a 50% bump, they're going to sell some. no sane company wants their primary investors to be a consortium of Robin hood day traders.
This is not at all how it works. Too much to get into, but banks don’t price IPOs at what it is going to trade up to. It’s not the goal.
It is tough, banks want to slightly underprice an IPO so there is a bump from offering to opening along with solid 1 day, 1 week performance to keep ipo investors happy, but some of these tech IPOs, Snowflake, DoorDash, Airbnb, etc., have been brutal. Insiders and early stage investors have to be skeptical of banks pricing their IPOs when you see the stock move up 100% from offer to opening, that is essentially money taken out of their pockets.
Would be valuable to read through these to get a better sense of the 'why' behind IPO pricing.
https://a16z.com/2020/08/28/in-defense-of-the-ipo/
https://a16z.com/2020/10/30/in-defense-of-the-ipo-and-how-to-improve-it…
this is great for tech/growth hedge funds tho - shrinking number of public companies/longer time to IPO decreases the opportunity set for public markets investors, easing the going public process increases the opportunity set
This is more of a hit to institutional investors than banks. Banks still advise and collect fees on direct listings (albeit less fee pot in total to reward a large number of banks). It's good for financial markets to have traditional IPOs and direct listings, but there are reasons IPOs are structured the way they are. In a direct listing, you won't have the same price stabilization offered by an IPO, and you won't be able to build out a book of long term investors. IPOs are risky and direct listings are even more so. Pros and cons to be weighed, likely at the expense of hiring an investment bank.
There are intangible reasons why companies want to IPO - there is the mkt splash of the news, then from a banking perspective you get the support of banks research and S&T, which helps in distribution. This likely makes sense for some situations but I dont think the IPO is going away materially due to this change.
I view this as a good thing, more competition will cause those that add no value to exit/flounder and existing players to up their game as this somewhat decentralizes/disintermediates the process. much like investors deserve choice rather than having to use expensive brokerage houses as gatekeepers, companies seeking capital should have more options as well
There is also the need to pay banks for putting out large revolver commitments at IPO..banks do that only knowing they'll get paid at IPO otherwise those are money loosing commitments. And every IPO'd Company needs a revolver..
Although it shrinks the total fee pool, it is probably a positive development overall. Assuming that the SPAC market remains active, it gives potential issuers three paths to a listing (IPO, SPAC, direct listing). Issuers can weigh the pros and cons of each and pick what is best for their situation.
Edit: fixed minor typo
you're supposed to blame the typo on the analyst.
Ha ha, yes, my mistake.
This really only applies to the high-profile tech companies. There are requirements for a direct listing that 90% of companies fail. Most companies need the marketing/distribution of underwriters.
If you want a fancy deck done, hire two consultants. If you want good advertising, hire an advertising firm. If you want to have your ass covered, hire a lawyer. Zero reason that ecm bankers get hired other than connections, and if you’re a high profile ipo, chances are in this market, you could get 3x subscribed with a business plan to light money on fire and sell the smoke (better plan than snowflake at least)
Neque itaque eum maxime in voluptatem et. Aut nisi rerum ullam dicta molestiae placeat ut. Rerum nesciunt qui sint nam sint reprehenderit. Consectetur fugit ut molestiae quod nobis.
Voluptatibus debitis officiis earum vero dolorem nihil iure. Corrupti porro ducimus perspiciatis officiis. Aut velit voluptatum vitae inventore. Explicabo qui reprehenderit labore beatae. Rerum ipsum nam rerum asperiores sit qui ut.
Quo quisquam aut voluptatibus doloremque quia. Assumenda tempora ut nihil quia. Saepe corrupti et expedita ipsa. Officia quam id id non harum adipisci voluptas.
Est sequi earum dolor nobis sequi soluta sapiente. Officia voluptatem repudiandae molestias. Cumque dolorem numquam rerum a.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...