logoalt Hacker News

asimtoday at 1:51 PM7 repliesview on HN

Quite honestly IPOs and the stock market in general is a Ponzi scheme. This is something I would never have said before. I am not a skeptic. I invested in the markets for years and made money on Amazon, Google, twilio, and so many others. But I also lost a lot of money buying near or after the IPO. The game is rigged. Those who put money in post IPO in the 12 months after are left holding the bag for years. It takes 10+ years to recover that. The people who invested pre IPO, the VCs, the bankers, etc. they are getting a good deal. In the case of VCs they are taking early risk. Not at the late stage. But earlier. In many cases it's been a long hold. Again 10+ years. But anyone coming in at the IPO you are buying at a peak when someone decided that's the perfect time to hype it. We're all catching a falling knife. Doesn't matter if the business fundamentals are sound. They become disconnected from realities of the market when it all gets tulip crazy.

These things have a way of working themselves out. But look at almost all IPOs and the next 12 months the stock is down 50+% so I'd rather wait. And honestly when I buy, it's to hold 10+ years, not make a quick buck and it's because I believe in the value. You can believe in SpaceX but also still believe the market and the dynamics of IPOs is almost criminal for retail investors.

It's almost as bad as crypto token sales tbh.


Replies

Maxatartoday at 2:09 PM

This isn't backed by any evidence though. Jay Ritter maintains an extensive amount of data on IPOs here:

https://site.warrington.ufl.edu/ritter/ipo-data/

And his data shows that IPOs for the most part perform about as well as their respective market. That is large multi-billion dollar IPOs perform about as well as the broad market, and smaller IPOs (which constitute the vast majority of IPOs) perform about as well as other small-cap companies.

In other words, investing in IPOs doesn't give much of an advantage or disadvantage compared to investing in other similarly sized companies.

What's true is that most stocks, including IPOs, don't do well in the long run. The half-life of a publicly traded company is something like 10 years.

show 1 reply
aftbittoday at 2:00 PM

>Doesn't matter if the business fundamentals are sound.

The business fundamentals are rarely sound for modern IPOs, especially anything Elon adjacent. His companies are just as bad as crypto token sales in terms of their hype. Heck, some of the stock price appreciation of Tesla _was_ driven by their ownership of crypto for a year or two.

an0maloustoday at 2:01 PM

Stocks, especially without dividends and negligible voting rights, are basically baseball cards for companies.

show 1 reply
spkingtoday at 2:11 PM

Warren Buffett famously said IPO stands for “It’s Probably Overpriced”.

mikestewtoday at 2:08 PM

It’s been true for over twenty years that the majority of IPOs drop below their IPO price and stay there. Maybe your brokerage has some shares before IPO day that they’ll let you buy, but you’re still taking a big risk. Buy shares on the open market? Yeah, you’re the sucker they were looking for.

martythemaniaktoday at 2:15 PM

There's been a massive change to public markets in the last decade and the retail path to making money seems to have closed. I made a some money on IPOs using a laughably simple heuristic:

"Is the company market cap low? Do they have a decent product? Is it plausible they'll 10x? Yes -> Buy some amount I can afford loosing"

For example, Tesla IPO'd at $5B cap, it was perfectly plausible to believe they'd be worth $50B some day. Shopify IPO'd at $1.3B, Square at $3B, 10x was perfectly believable. Uber IPO'd at $75B, I did not believe they'd be worth $750B any time soon, or ever. Do I believe SpaceX will be worth 20T in like 10 years? Lol. Fmao even.

Today's IPOs at $1T+ means that private money figured this out and cut the retail public out, IPOs seems to be a really terrible deal these days.

semiquavertoday at 2:16 PM

What you’re saying is entirely vibes-based. The actual data utterly contradicts your claim (see sibling).

show 1 reply