11 ms·
Partying like it’s 1999 – Initial public offerings are back in Silicon Valley
- batt4good 6y agoAnd it looks like California is planning on keeping an ever larger portion of that oh so sweet founder IPO dough!...
- godzillabrennus 6y agoGood time to shelter in place in a tax haven now that your working remotely. New Hampshire can be quiet lovely.
- onlyrealcuzzo 6y agoCalifornia is quite aggressive at taxing income from stock people were granted while living in California.
- fiberoptick 6y agoYour comment is technically correct, but misleading. In fact California specifically does not tax ex-residents for income arising from the disposition of stock acquired with ISOs, which is usually the way pre-IPO employees acquire shares. This is true even if the ISOs were granted for work performed in California.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- batt4good 6y agoYou should look into the recent proposed bills that target exactly this. The provision that made headlines was a wealth tax on $30MM personal wealth, however it also includes enormous income tax hikes on anything above $1MM and explicitly targets capital gains.
- jedberg 6y ago> however it also includes enormous income tax hikes on anything above $1MM It's a 1% tax hike on income over $1M, 3% on over $2M, and 3.5% on income above $5M. I wouldn't call that enormous.
- batt4good 6y agoAt rates like this, the gov't (federal and state) are collectively taking more than half my income and still can't seem to function properly. 3% is enormous on top of existing sky high CA numbers...
- octernion 6y agostill far below historical highs if you are being taxed at that marginal rate.
- siberianbear 6y agoIs this true in general? The Silicon Valley company I worked at for a long time started out with ISOs, then as the company grew scrapped ISOs in favor of NSQ (nonqualifed options) and then later scrapped those and just gave RSUs. The move from ISO->NSQ had some tax advantage to the company even though it is obviously worse for the employees.
- batt4good 6y agoI live and work in NYC but the company I'm employed by is based in CA. How fucked am I if I'm ever able to cash out my equity. Note, technically I'm a resident of NYC. If I don't have an office by next year, I've decided to move back to TX, or pick a spot in New Hampshire or Vermont.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- neonate 6y agohttps://archive.is/GSxK4 https://archive.is/GSxK4
- jedberg 6y agoMight as well get your piece of the pie while the government is still pumping billions into the market with QE.
- WealthVsSurvive 6y agoPartying like it's 1929.
- jdc 6y agoHowever unlike that period, we won't have to deal with a contracting money supply.
- sigmaprimus 6y agoIt's actually the opposite that will need to be dealt with. How much of the recent stock market gains are due to a hidden inflation thanks to the trillions of dollars being borrowed (or printed) by all the governments around the world? Get ready for 2 dollar eggs and 20 dollar loaves of bread!
- csomar 6y agoIt’s possible it doesn’t result in inflation if the general public doesn’t benefit from the stock market appreciation. Worse, it might make them poorer if they buy the top. But it probably means hot markets like nyc, sf, la will remain very expensive.
- danieltillett 6y agoI am most sure if NYC and SF are too hot at the moment. It really is hard to say what will happen as the banking system is so different today than in the past. I do think we will see continued leaking of all the new money that is being printed out into hard assets, but beyond that I have no idea.
- 6y ago
- contingencies 6y agoThis is uncharacteristically poor journalism from the Economist. The graph shows excepting 2009 and 2016 there has been effectively no significant downturn, whereas the title suggests an order of magnitude change in the last two years.
- knolax 6y agoI wouldn't say uncharacteristic. The economist has always been short on details and overflowing with unecessary snark.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y agoUnlike, say, HN comments?
- supernova87a 6y agoAgreed, the Economist's habit of laying out a few kindergarten-level facts and then extrapolating to what the world should do is pretty irritating. Enough that after one subscription I swore off reading them generally.
- Austin_Conlon 6y agoCan you provide some examples? I think this would only apply to the Leaders sections, but the point of it is to serve as introductions for later articles. The rest I've found to be thorough, especially the Briefing section and Technology Quarterly. It's definitely full of "shoulds" from a classical liberal perspective.
- logicslave12 6y agoYeah I stopped reading the economist a long time ago. Zero good information from them
- theptip 6y agoSorry, I'm not following your complaint -- the article leads with: > When the pandemic hit in March, initial public offerings, particularly those by technology startups, were predicted to be among the early victims. After all, who wants to go public in a once-in-a-century crisis? Quite a few people, it turns out. In the past couple of months ipos, which all but dried up until late May, have come back with a vengeance in America And then presents a graph comparing YTD with previous years, showing more IPOs in 2020 YTD than any point in the last 15 years, with tech company IPOs in (eyeballed) the top quartile of the last 15 years. I read this article as claiming: 1) The prediction was that IPOs would go down; they are not (any more). 2) IPO volume for YTD is historically strong, though not at '90s dot-com boom levels. (I'd have preferred their IPO volume chart to go back 25 years so that it showed the build-up to 1999, but that's a different complaint I think.) Where are you getting the suggestion of an order of magnitude change?
- xoxoy 6y agoAnd Tesla just surpassed Walmart in market cap even though their total quarterly deliveries have been relatively flat around 80-90k per quarter for almost 2 years.
- 01100011 6y agoIt's an obvious short opportunity but how can you know how long the market will remain irrational?
- api 6y agoIs it? Which company has more growth ahead of it? Wal-Mart is slowly digesting in the Amazon Saarlac pit like all retail. Stocks are valued by growth unless they pay a lot of dividends, and dividends are rare today.
- mpfundstein 6y agoquite funny that you are downvoted. you are totally right tesla is a forward looking company that will continue to surprise while walmarts whole business will suffer due to the implications of the corona crisis.
- eldavido 6y agoNot quite that simple, Amazon tried to buy Whole Foods last year and has basically failed to get traction on groceries. Not saying you're completely incorrect but there's room for a lot of companies in retail doing a lot of different stuff.
- mkr-hn 6y agoI always assumed the Whole Foods purchase was about data collection and retail space for developing and deploying store automation.
- nip180 6y agoWalmart is growing, and hits over $500B revenue a year. Growing at that scale is impressive. Tesla sales luxury cars during an economic recession. Walmart sells cheap food and household goods. I’d buy Walmart stock before Tesla if I had to choose a long position on one or the other.
- dehrmann 6y agoThe interesting game people will get to play is if Biden wins and Democrats control at least the House, do you hold onto your shares and hope the Democrats bring back the SALT deduction.
- jedberg 6y agoThey won’t bring it back. They don’t want the SALT deduction either. They just didn’t want to piss off their voters. To be fair, getting rid of SALT was a good move. It makes the tax code more fair. There is no reason for the federal government to subsidize someone who lives in California or New York.
- coliveira 6y agoThe stock market is living in a dream land where it doesn't matter that the real economy is doing badly, they can count on nearly unstoppable supply of money flowing from the Fed. In this situation it is obvious that all stock prices will skyrocket, but the most probable outcome is a crash in 1929's style.