3 ms·
Hmm. To me that just shifts the questions to the bankers. If people (who don't know anything the bankers don't know) value the stock at $24, shouldn't there al
by unholiness 10y ago
Hmm. To me that just shifts the questions to the bankers.
If people (who don't know anything the bankers don't know) value the stock at $24, shouldn't there also be competing bankers willing to offer $20 a share for the whole lot, igniting a bidding war that converges roughly near the real price?
Obviously bankers need to make some money. But I don't see how this kind of deal has anywhere near a $1.4 billion dollar overhead, and I'm just boggled by the scale of the disparity.
- chimeracoder 10y ago> If people (who don't know anything the bankers don't know) value the stock at $24, shouldn't there also be competing bankers willing to offer $20 a share for the whole lot, igniting a bidding war that converges roughly near the real price? Yes, though with a discount factor applied due to the risk involved. And particularly for a high-profile IPO like $SNAP, and one in which a lot of the sellers on Day 1 will be casual retail investors placing market orders[0], it's hard to gauge exactly how much hype there will be. [0] ie, as opposed to limit orders