4 ms·
I think in this case it makes sense. Groupon restated a sharp drop in their reported revenues over three years. People don't necessarily invest in things they
by zecho 15y ago
I think in this case it makes sense. Groupon restated a sharp drop in their reported revenues over three years.
People don't necessarily invest in things they think are particularly good business models. They invest in things that are undervalued. If you looked at the revenue/price and thought it was undervalued and then Groupon changed 3 years worth of data on your after you made a stock purchase, you'd sue too.
Just look at these reductions. They're more than just a minor correction from Groupon:
- For 2008, revenue was reduced to $5,000, from $94,000.
- For 2009, revenue was reduced to $14.54 million, from $30.47 million.
- For 2010, revenue was reduced to $312.9 million, from $713.4 million.
- run4yourlives 15y agoPeople don't necessarily invest in things they think are particularly good business models. If you can't figure out the business model generating the reported millions, it's your own fault for thinking those millions are undervalued. How many of these investors didn't actually care about the value of the stock, so long as there was somebody around tomorrow that would buy it for more? Sorry, but I have no sympathy when you willingly play the game and then get burned by the same things you intended to inflict on someone else.
- ceejayoz 15y ago> If you can't figure out the business model generating the reported millions... How, exactly, would I figure out that Groupon was lying/mistaken in their financials?
- prodigal_erik 15y agoI'm not entitled to lie to investors just because they should be smart enough to disbelieve me. There's a point beyond which it's not feasible for third parties to know how realistic my financial statements are, so the SEC has mandated I'm on the hook when I write them.