Linkedin IPO
LinkedIn's stocked opened at $83 after its IPO was priced at $45 and is now trading around $100 implying that those select few investors that received stock allocations this morning are sitting on capital gains in excess of 100% on the first day of trading! I was wondering how easy it is a retail investor to by shares at offering price? I have $5000 to invest and wish I somehow had bought the shares to make short term gains. I assume it would not be as easy as opening a stock trading account and buying the shares. I have never invested before so sorry if the question is too basic.
you will never be allocated shares of an IPO at the offering price if you have $5000.
You need to get an allocation from the underwriters (in this case Morgan Stanley). And in order to do that, you've got to be a long time institutional client that also buys into their shitty IPOs as well.
Not to mention that even if you do get an allocation, you're usually locked up and prevented from selling your shares for several months, if not years. You can't just flip 'em on opening day.
Man, in the old days we used to beat the shit out of our new offerings. Over allocations, DvP accounts, selling in the first ten minutes, we did it all. Good times.
hey Edmundo..how long ago are you talking about? When I was in India in 2008, Reliance power IPO, one of the most overhyped in India, was oversubscribed big time. Did it use to be a similar case in US markets? http://archive.vccircle.com/wordpress/2008/01/15/buzz-hype-reliance-pow…
The existing shareholders have a lockup, the purchasing institutions do not.
I know Fidelity will let you participate in certain IPOs but you have to have at least $100,000 in your account. But even if you have that it usually requires even more than that just to make an offer.
So in short no way you are getting into an ipo with 5 grand. sorry
Why so many threads about this? Fuck LinkedIn.
Also, investing in a company that just went IPO for short term gains is silly. IPOs tend to overvalue companies.
i want to get on the short bandwagon... so overvalued, and i want a piece of that downside...
Completely agree. that would be sweet.
Yeah I mean basically the only way to get a piece of an ultra-hot IPO like LinkedIn is to be a big client... brokers and bankers that have pieces to give will offer it to their top guys first to keep them happy. It's basically an orgy of "big money" until the thing opens up and trades publicly, at which point the sucker individuals with $5,000 decide to invest and get owned like sheep.
Here's a serious question:
I can't tell on which side of the fence I sit. Did Morgan Stanley (et al) really mess this IPO up by pricing too low, leaving lots of money on the table for LinkedIn Corp and probably fucked themselves out of potential public offerings for Facebook/Zynga/Twitter etc..
or
Do you think this was intentional? Did the underwriters just deliver a fantastic gift to some of their larger institutional investors prompting possible investment into their own sagging stock, or did they only want to rush this deal out to market to better handle the (potential) flood of new firms they would rather work on who have more money?
I don't think the argument could seriously be made that MS messed up the offering. Even at $35 a share it was an aggressive valuation. Moving it up to $45 based on indications of interest made it even moreso.
I think we just witnessed an old-school, well-managed IPO. MS was committed to seeing this thing go higher, and they accomplished that. I have no doubt there was a serious amount of arm twisting to guarantee huge demand in the aftermarket and they got the pop they were looking for.
Now they can pitch other silly Internet companies and say "look what we did for LinkedIn. We got them a 1,000 P/E on day one."
Yeah, but don't you have to consider that at least a few people at LinkedIn are a little sour over the fact that $300 million was essentially missing from their great day? Plenty of big name Silicon Valley types (Reid Hoffman, David Sze etc) sit on that board and operate lots of angel investing firms and were probably looking for a larger payout. Granted, they got a ton of money for their efforts but something like this might influence people to try another large technology underwriter (Goldman) for their IPOs which are all but inevitable at this point.
I dunno.. I feel like greed will play a factor here. Goldman has to be pretty upset that they made a huge investment but were left off the underwriting duties, and will likely try to convince other start ups that they can get them more money.
LinkedIn is garbage, it will be virtually worthless within a few years.
Nostrum et iusto perspiciatis dolorem aut maxime. Vel expedita suscipit ab atque voluptas et. Occaecati voluptates velit alias veniam accusamus. Repellendus laudantium sint labore quis et omnis. Veniam laudantium quia nemo vel. Aut officiis similique nobis corrupti aut aut eum. Quod aut dolorem sapiente magnam occaecati odio dignissimos totam.
Cum sunt earum dolor quas voluptas qui repudiandae aut. Aperiam natus aliquid voluptatum voluptate animi autem aut. Illo libero dolores voluptatibus consequatur fuga perferendis cupiditate aliquid.
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...