Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
asim | on: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status
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.

Maxatar | parent | next
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.

MikhailTal | root | parent
Also, the OP just does not understand how the market works anyway. Surely if it was obvious that investing in fresh IPOs is a bad move, all of the big boys (banks, hedge funds etc) would short them to the point of equalising anyway. Maybe not to the absolute efficient point, but still, why do people think they can see such a huge obvious trend, and also assume that other people cannot see it?
loading story #48924365
aftbit | parent | next
>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.

an0malous | parent | next
Stocks, especially without dividends and negligible voting rights, are basically baseball cards for companies.
Ekaros | root | parent
That is funny comparison looking how baseball card markets have gone recently. Which is extreme increases in prices for little logical reasons. Or has baseball massively increased in popularity? (Honest question)
an0malous | root | parent
I would guess it’s the same force driving absurd stock valuations — the money supply doubled around COVID and all the new money has to pool up somewhere. Some of it ends up in stocks and real estate, but once those become obviously overvalued it starts pooling up in more fringe investments like trading cards. It’s the same dynamic that created exotic mortgage backed securities that led to the 2008 financial crisis. There’s literally trillions of dollars of capital that’s slowly losing value from inflation and the owners of that capital are desperate to find investments that will preserve or increase their wealth.
Ekaros | root | parent
And on lower end for many it feels that they are out of options. So flipping or speculating on anything they can get their hands on is only way to make it in life now. Pokemon cards is biggest example of this. People camping and literally fighting over in essence scraps for very small amount of product to then just resell it to someone else. Who probably speculate on it themselves or need for it to run some type of other scheme like gambling...

It really is weird market from outside. Like millions of cards waiting to be encapsulated in plastic with tiny label on them naming a number. Depending on number the value can go up multiple times. Each of these paid at least something like 20 dollars...

spking | parent | next
Warren Buffett famously said IPO stands for “It’s Probably Overpriced”.
mikestew | parent | next
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.
martythemaniak | parent | next
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.

semiquaver | parent
What you’re saying is entirely vibes-based. The actual data utterly contradicts your claim (see sibling).
tclancy | root | parent
I don't think so. It's strident and it may be eliding some details, but the idea is IPO shares are available to institutional investors first and that adds a tax for retail investors that is probably not worth paying. A suspicious mind might go so far as thinking the institutional investors don't necessarily care about the underlying metrics at IPO up to a certain number of shares: they know that whatever X opens at, they can get 1.25X for the shares immediately after.