16 ms·

Why I'm thrilled Mark Zuckerberg is annoying the bankers

240 points by dean 14y ago

wtvanhest 14y ago
Zuckerburg is not annoying any bankers or the buyside, I assure you of that. The only people mentioning it are reporters and sell side analysts. (The guy he mentions in the article is a sell side analyst)
- TDL 14y ago
  Thank you. No one pays much attention to sell-side analysts. If I were one of the bankers on the FB deal I would be more surprised if Zuckerburg came to a meeting with a suit on.
  - wtvanhest 14y ago
    Exactly. And if he had come in a suit people would have been saying that he cares so much about what "Wall Street" thinks that he must be "selling out" or even worse trying to get a higher than valuation than FB deserves etc.
bitdiddle 14y ago
must be a slow news day
joelrunyon 14y ago
I'm not a huge facebook fan, but I have to agree. Since when is wall street in a position to say "we need to be taken seriously" after all the crap they caused first hand to things for the sake of making money. Isn't all the faux-positioning and over-reverence to the banks the main problem with wall street anyway?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- ams6110 14y ago
  Wall Street might take themselves more seriously if we had let them feel some pain from their mistakes. Instead we bailed them out, like a rich parent bails his spoiled kid out of jail after a DUI.
  - cglace 14y ago
    Insert some comment about how our economy would have fallen into a death spiral if we hand't have bailed them out.
EternalFury 14y ago
What he wears should not matter, except he has a dress code for people who come interview for a job at Facebook. So, he certainly deserves a ribbing for believing he is above his own rules.
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  > So, he certainly deserves a ribbing for believing he is above his own rules. Clearly, he is. I'd imagine most of his employees don't get to hop on the private jet whenever they feel like it, either.
- ojbyrne 14y ago
  I'm curious about where you came up with this assertion. I interviewed at FB and nobody told me what to wear.
  - joering2 14y ago
    thats funny; they told me to come to the prom night and didnt mention a thing about what to dress, but still I haven't came naked. just because they havent told doesn't necessarily mean you shouldnt have your own sense as of what to wear to work. if that would be me, and not seeing anyone how they really look at work inside fb, i would came with suit and tie and figure things out the first day.
    - gergles 14y ago
      If you would show up at Facebook wearing a suit and tie on your first day, they should probably fire you on the spot for being so utterly braindead as to not figure out any of their culture from your interview or from Internet research or from the "what's it like to work at Facebook" videos and pictures they have on their career site.
      - tomjen3 14y ago
        Actually a person could be wellknown by wearing a suit to work at Facebook. After all when all the non-conformist looks differently the same way, you need to do something different to stand out.
creamyhorror 14y ago
I like this quote from another CNet article on the Facebook IPO: ---- In the case of Facebook -- whose T-shirt-wearing, 27-year-old chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, is said to appreciate status updates more than stock brokers -- it's unlikely advisors will be able to command the standard rate. "These Valley types think this whole process could be automated and they don't have to pay 7 percent to these flashy, French-cufflink-wearing Wall Street types," said Eric Jackson, founder and managing member of Ironfire Capital, a technology-focused hedge fund, who has interacted professionally with executives at Facebook and other social-media companies. ---- I doubt the IPO process can be automated to any large degree (unless all the players somehow started thinking like engineers) but I'd sure be happy to see people try!
- mazuhl 14y ago
  From the other article on HN today it seems that they've tried to do some of that. They wrote their own pre-IPO prospectus and done the leg-work themselves on other things. It's not "automated", but it's cutting out a lot of what those finance companies would have done.
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago
  >I doubt the IPO process can be automated to any large degree Why? What's so complicated about it?
  - creamyhorror 14y ago
    I don't know much about it, but it does mainly seem to be about business and social relationships, due diligence, negotiation, accounting, and marketing with a compelling pitchbook or whatever they call it. It doesn't seem so much like a target for automation so much as a target for "pro-competitive intervention" (which is very unlikely to happen).
  - chernevik 14y ago
    Stocks generally don't trade on purely quantitative analysis, but on investor assessments of their 'story' and how that will play out over time. If you think corporations are going to invest in networking gear you look at Cisco et al. You inspect that universe for management (good or bad?) / product (great? promising new stuff? obsoleting?) / financial stories (leverage? balance sheet clarity?), and for valuation (P / E, enterprise value to EBITDA). If you think someone's valuation is low given the stories you believe, you buy. For seasoned stocks a market consensus about the relevant stories emerge, and events within those stories drive the trading moves. People making money by being the first to adopt or drop stories. But an IPO has no market-consensus stories of its own. So the book-building process involves explaining the company and getting market feedback on the credibility of that story. Now this may or may not make sense. But it does give management some feeling of relationship with the market, by which they can hear what investors think and possibly influence those perceptions. Given the importance of stock price to most managements, it would be a very bold team that went forward without any perceived tool for managing the process.
antidaily 14y ago
Aren't people reading a little too much into this? He probably owns one suit and forgot to get it pressed.
jbooth 14y ago
I've got a question for the repeated assertions that "JP morgan / GS / etc repaid their bailout money"... They only repaid that money because the bailed-out AIG paid off their credit default swaps, right? So isn't it only true in the most narrow sense that they paid it back, considering that the gov't totally ate it on AIG?
- tedunangst 14y ago
  Yes, but if you want to take a narrow view, you can't blame Chase for AIG's mistakes. "Bailout" money is tracked in the account of the entity that receives it, but I don't think it's reasonable to continue tracing it as it moves around. Bailout dollars are just as green as regular dollars. If someone at Chase buys a car with bailout dollars, then the car salesman buys lunch with his commission, are you going to claw back the bailout dollars from the waiter? Debts are owed by the people who receive the money, not the guy left holding the hot potato.
  - jbooth 14y ago
    Sure you can. You buy a bond, you're not guaranteed 4% interest, you're gambling that the entity who's indebted to you will still be around long enough to pay you. Same with these credit default swaps. If the government doesn't step in, AIG folds and Chase doesn't get paid for those CDS contracts. Nobody paid the government back for AIG.
    - tedunangst 14y ago
      And the government insured AIG. that doesn't move the debt from AIG's books to Chase's books.
      - jbooth 14y ago
        The government did not back those credit default swaps, until they did of course. But the fact that the government stood behind other forms of insurance at AIG doesn't mean that they were obligated to pay back the CDSs. Again, until they did so after the fact.
grumps 14y ago
I don't like either (FB or Wall Street). I will enjoy watch the two fight it out.
tatsuke95 14y ago
>"He's in a position most of us who have scrambled to find obscure documents in order to get a mortgage dream about: Telling a bunch of bankers to take it or leave it." Um, banks are no different than your auto mechanic. They want and are competing for your business. You can always tell them take it or leave it. People seem to have this bizarre mentality that you have to go begging to your bank for money, which is hardly the case. Personal business like mortgages and chequing accounts, and for that matter things as large as an IPO, are hyper-competitive. There is a lot of room to shop around. What is it about banking that people find so intimidating and confusing?
- revorad 14y ago
  To put it mildly, there are more auto mechanics than banks.
- ArekDymalski 14y ago
  Exactly. Bankers aren't 'giving you money'. They're just providing simple service, for a fee.
- joelrunyon 14y ago
  I think the point was that unlike a lot of situations many Americans find themselves in, when going up against a bank, Zuckerberg has leverage - not a lot of people can say that these days (there are a lot more average people applying for mortgages than there are Facebooks applying for IPOs).
  - excuse-me 14y ago
    Actually at the moment you are probably in a lot better position than the bank - you have money which you are prepared to lend them at a very low rate of interest. Similarly when you take out a mortgage - your interest is paying their salaries. It's a service industry and the bank manager is your servant. The only different these days is that you are probably in a much better financial state than the bank!
    - 14y ago
anotherthrow 14y ago
So Mark Zuckerberg wears the regulation silicon valley uniform to a meeting with bankers wearing their regulation wall street uniform? I'm not sure what the interesting content to this story is, but would be happy to be enlightened!
dasil003 14y ago
An investment banker annoyed by Zuckerberg wearing a hoodie is equally impotent to someone who can't wait to see Zuckerberg "stick it to the bankers". Focus on stuff that matters.
septerr 14y ago
Suits are so passé.
tomgallard 14y ago
I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that I think he's being rude and arrogant. Yes, he's in a position of power, and could turn up to his meetings wearing only a cunningly positioned silk scarf, and it would have no effect on the banks' willingness to earn lots of money from overseeing the Facebook IPO. But when you're in a position of power you also have a responsibility not to be a dick. I realize dress codes etc are a bit different over there in the US, but at work here I normally dress pretty casually. However, if someone's coming in for interview, I will wear a suit. As I know the candidate's going to turn up in a suit, and it will make them feel uncomfortable if I'm interviewing them in shorts and a t-shirt. The person in the position of power has a moral obligation not to make everyone else feel uncomfortable or stupid. A great example of this is Queen Victoria drinking from her finger-bowl after one of her guests did - in order to save them from any embarassment or discomfort (http://www.bobssermons.com/sermons/archive/030831.htm http://www.bobssermons.com/sermons/archive/030831.htm). And yes, bankers have acted arrogantly, and swanned around like they own the place too long. But its hardly a great example to set to just start doing the same yourself as soon as the balance of power tilts.
- mbesto 14y ago
  I can't disagree more. But when you're in a position of power you also have a responsibility not to be a dick. Say's who? The greatest minds of our day challenge status quo's, not accept them. "Dress" has historically been a badge of status, which has historically been inherited. I think the big "F U" that Mark is trying to portray (much like Jobs) is that his meritocracy wins. Bureaucrats wear suits, Meritocrats wear hoodies.
  - mcknz 14y ago
    The true test (if all this even matters) will be to see how he carries himself if Facebook ever needs investor money for its survival.
  - tomgallard 14y ago
    So if the bankers started wearing hoodies they'll become Meritocratic? Portraying 'not wearing a suit' as challenging the status quo is a bit of an exaggeration. Maybe Gandhi challenged the status quo with his choice of outfit, but a billionaire turning up to a meeting in a suit is hardly sticking it to the man. I think it works both ways incidentally- if the banker is coming to your place of work, and you all wear hoodies and shorts, he should make an effort to dress casually too.
DanI-S 14y ago
The idea that here, in the 21st century, any successful entrepreneur must garb oneself in rarely-worn, extremely expensive and generally inconvenient Victorian-era ceremonial dress in order to arrange a business transaction is utterly ludicrous. I'm most effective when I'm at my most confident, and I'm most confident when wearing the clothing that I am used to wearing every day. That might be a suit, and it might be the affordable and well-designed utility clothing that 99% of humanity wears. If it's good enough to wear whilst creating a company worth billions of dollars, it's good enough to wear whilst selling it.
- oconnore 14y ago
  > rarely-worn, extremely expensive and generally inconvenient Victorian-era ceremonial dress This annoys me. The 'dev-uniform' of t-shirt, jeans and sneakers is just as constraining as the 'business-uniform' of suits and button downs. You rarely wear one, they are not necessarily expensive, and they are not inconvenient. Basically, there is nothing inherently better about jeans and a t-shirt, and nothing inherently bad about suits or anything else that isn't in either category. The key is to not expect others to comply to your weird ideas about dress code and let everyone express themselves without stereotyping them.
  - muhfuhkuh 14y ago
    "Basically, there is nothing inherently better about jeans and a t-shirt" More comfortable, more durable, cheaper, better selection of comfortable footwear that doesn't need servicing by a person at the airport or the main floor of an office building... need I go on?
    - oconnore 14y ago
      My suit is very comfortable. It doesn't fall apart. I paid under $100 for an entire outfit (I paid $120 for my jeans sans t-shirt). My shoes are super comfy and I've never had to get them serviced?
      - 14y ago
loverobots 14y ago
The bankers might return the favor with downgrades and other stuff soon enough (and yes, he will have to care once the stock goes down, no matter what he says). Some occasions call for slippers, others for khakis and others for a suit and tie. Wear an ill fitting suit to show that you're not comfortable in one if want, but wear a freaking suit. You're asking strangers to buy with their hard earned money about $10 billion of your $100 billion pie. Show some respect for the occasion.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
phillmv 14y ago
>"Mark and his signature hoodie: He's actually showing investors he doesn't care that much; he's going to be him. I think that's a mark of immaturity," Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter complained to Bloomberg's Mark Milian. "I think that he has to realize he's bringing investors in as a new constituency right now, and I think he's got to show them the respect that they deserve because he's asking them for their money." Christ, what an asshole. It's a negotiation tactic, one many of us use in interviews: by flaunting social convention and dressing down, you're signaling that you have leverage. Mark is the one being wooed, and not the other way around. By whining about it in the press it just makes it sound like this fellow just isn't used to being the lowest status person in the room.
- joering2 14y ago
  He wasn't an asshole. Mark is 27 years old. How old is the Wall Street and banking system in this country? Its older than his parents! Bankers are evil, but if you come for money you better show them respect because they rule the game and hold most of chips. I agree with author. Fun time is over! FB needs to show profits and prove to stockholders that its worth their money. Coming in hoodie helps publicity, but that's it. It tells average Facebook yuppie "oh Mark is "selling" but hey he still is himself so everything is fine". FB and internet is still too young to figure itself out. This could be bubble. FB can go down like anything that was trendy in its time. I think buying Instagram for that much money shows how desperately scared Mark is. He was incredibly lucky that Instagram owners didnt turn out to be another Mark and say "we don't sell" and keep building momentum. My sisters that are trendoholics switched from reading "boring" (according to them) Facebook updates and messages to taking snapshots and limited wording on Insta. Trend is moving beyond FB and Mark knows it! Next time when FB wants to buy something overtaking the net, they may hear "no, thank you".
  - romaniv 14y ago
    if you come for money you better show them respect Okay, so he didn't. What are they going to do? Complain about it? Anyway, ethics is about what people should do. If you switch to discussing what people can get away with because of power, you're no longer discussing ethics. If you switch back and forth, using "what X can get away with" standard for people with power and "what they should do" for everyone else, then there is something wrong with your argument.
elorant 14y ago
Even the almighty Steve Jobs when visited a Nobel award ceremony wore a tie. Bottom line it all depends on the importance of the event. You can't demand respect, you can only earn it. And the bankers haven't earn it a bit.
- kthakar3 14y ago
  I agree. Zuck wore a tie and suit for the Obama dinner.
rbucks 14y ago
Has anyone ever seen Steve Jobs where a suit and tie?
- 16BitTons 14y ago
  http://www.kitguru.net/apple/carl/why-did-steve-jobs-wear-turtlenecks/ http://www.kitguru.net/apple/carl/why-did-steve-jobs-wear-tu...
hristov 14y ago
Big f-ing deal. This is basically a puff piece. I don't think he is annoying the bankers, at this point everyone expects him to wear a hoodie. If he really wanted to annoy the bankers he would have done google style Dutch auction ipo. The bankers really hated that.
cmillllllls 14y ago
He got this far wearing a hoodie, why wear a tie now?
excuse-me 14y ago
Of course if he was a real maverick he would tell the bankers and the stock market to stuff it. He has more customers on his site than the Nasdaq has share buyers/sellers. If he decided to reinvent stock markets and simply sell shares directly to facebook members then you would see some panic! After all if shares are all traded electronically why do we need a room full of scrolling displays pretending to be ticker tape and opened by a bell? Why not have buying and selling shares in any company a feature of facebook ?
- frabcus 14y ago
  At last! There are good reasons, but they're all regulatory, and there are workarounds. Let's have some proper disruption of the finance industry, please. Now!
- johnyzee 14y ago
  Exactly. I was a lot more impressed by Larry and Sergei's IPO, where they really gave a fat middle finger to the Street. Who gives a fuck about a hoodie. This is just a branding exercise to show how 'real' Mark Zuckerberg is and I would be surprised if there wasn't some high-powered PR people involved in shaping his public image, including the whole hoodie thing and training him in public speaking (and possibly placing fawning stories like this one).
- Tichy 14y ago
  I had the same idea. I think FB even has all the infrastructure in place already. They have Facebook coins, virtual goods, transactions. Shares could be just another virtual good.
heyrhett 14y ago
"My name is Barack Obama, and I'm the guy that got Mark to wear a jacket and tie." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/mark-zuckerberg-wears-tie-jeans-obama-interview_n_851746.html#s267561 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/mark-zuckerberg-wea...
RyLuke 14y ago
"Clothing is the outward expression of a man’s state of mind. It is his attire that tells the world what he thinks of himself." -Pearl Binder "Dressing conscientiously is exalting in the act of being alive." -Gay Talese It doesn't much matter what Zuckerberg signals or doesn't signal to Wall Street bankers by wearing a hoodie. It won't have a material impact on his company's offering. Coco Chanel used to say that one shouldn't leave the house without putting some effort into one's appearance -- if only out of politeness. It is, after all, the rest of us who have to look at you. The most unfortunate part of this story is that Zuckerberg fails to realize -- or care -- that a little sartorial attention imparts respect for the people with whom you are doing business, both personally and professionally. Whether he likes it or not, Zuck is now a high profile individual, with all the attention that follows suit. That's, in my mind, an opportunity to think critically about how he presents himself aesthetically. Contrary to what most posters here seem to think, fashion isn't binary: there are more choices than a hoodie and jeans or a suit. Putting some effort into his appearance doesn't mean he has to look like, or imply endorsement of, Wall Street bankers. If anything, purposefully flaunting that convention is the opposite side of the same coin.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
oz 14y ago
I'm as sartorial as they come. My friends call me 'Swagnificent'; I typically wore tailored, French-cuff shirts, a fedora and suits to my former job as a sysadmin at a Big 4 firm. People regularly stop me on the street and ask to take pictures of me. TL;DR, I'm all for dressing up. But something about this delights me. Imagine, walking into a room of self-indulgent, Wall Street pricks, knowing that they're tripping over themselves to get in on the action. I think I'd be tempted to rub it in. Ordinarily, someone approaches a bank out of their own necessity. Here, the tables have turned. And I love it. Wasn't there a story a few years back about Microsoft calling Zuck for conference call at 9AM, and he told them he was still sleeping; and to call back?
- kemiller 14y ago
  Dressing well as a sysadmin is an act of rebellion. ;)
  - oz 14y ago
    Touche :)
  - blasdel 14y ago
    it can also be pathetic: http://achewood.com/index.php?date=11012004 http://achewood.com/index.php?date=11012004
- atonse 14y ago
  I'm similar and I too got the same amount of pleasure reading this. Wall Street investors don't have any principles. The only thing they care about is how much money you make for them. Zuck could've shown up naked and they would've still jumped all over each other to invest in Facebook. And this idiot who complained that Zuck underdressed - if he doesn't invest because of that, and the stock skyrockets, you think he's still going to have his job? Doubt it. He'd be out on the street wearing a hoodie.
  - oz 14y ago
    >if he doesn't invest because of that, and the stock skyrockets, you think he's still going to have his job? Doubt it. He'd be out on the street wearing a hoodie. That, my dear friend, would be priceless.
creamyhorror 14y ago
The Wikioracle tells us: --- Western business wear is standard in many workplaces around the globe, even in countries where the usual daily wear may be a distinctive national costume. Some non-Western businesspeople will wear national costume nonetheless. A Saudi Arabian sheikh may wear the traditional robes and headdress to an international conference; United Arab Emirates diplomats in particular are noted for attending conventions of the United Nations General Assembly in full keffiyeh and thawb. Diplomats of the People's Republic of China are similarly noted for wearing the Mao suit to international events; Indian leaders often wear Nehru jackets, with Manmohan Singh wearing a suit-like combination including such a jacket with his Sikh turban. Wearing national costume in such contexts can proclaim national pride, or just extremely high status which allows the wearer to defy convention. --- Indeed, maybe that's what's happening here: the corporate chieftain showing his power among those in the room. Let Zuckerberg peacock; he is within his full rights to. Does a client have to dress however his banker does?
georgemcbay 14y ago
Anyone who follows the console gaming market will instantly recognize Michael Pachter as a first-class media troll that says ridiculous things to get his name mentioned in articles. It would probably be better to just ignore this guy instead of playing into him.
ggchappell 14y ago
There's an unspoken assumption behind all this, that I'm wondering about. So, FB is having the usual IPO roadshow, but they're not doing it quite as expected. My question: Why are they having the roadshow at all? Instead they could have done a few interviews with major business magazines (which I believe they did), put out what amounts to an annual report, to get people information, maybe even had a special hotshot-analyst-only webpage for submitting questions about strategy & what not. What does the roadshow get them that the above wouldn't have? The only things I can think of are time & money spent, and lots of headaches.
readme 14y ago
Awesome. I take this as a sign things are changing. I can't wait to see the day when technology companies are the top of the food chain, and bankers are second.
zerostar07 14y ago
Did this guy just type 2 pages about a hoodie? (and 167 people found this interesting?)
12uu45dd 14y ago
Microsoft made him wealthy. People became amazed and dazed, willing to give him more money. Good on him for not caring. FU money. He suckered Microsoft and that's enough. He's set for life. But it's not the hoodie, it's who's in it. If he's rejected by investment bankers, it's not because he wore a hoodie. It's because of who he is. Wearing hoodies to meetings is but one very small part.
rottyguy 14y ago
Zuck is about to step into (F*ck You Money ^ N) so what else would you expect?
SkyMarshal 14y ago
We're Facebook. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits.
danteembermage 14y ago
The average IPO proceeds for the past two decades have never exceeded 100 million and have been hovering around 70 for a while. At 3% that means the typical cut is $2.1 million or less. Facebook plans to raise $11.8 billion, which at 1% would be $118 million. Compensation of fifty times normal implied by the 1% figure thrown out in the article still seems pretty high.
mkramlich 14y ago
What Zuckerberg chooses to wear to a meeting with bankers should not matter at all. If anything it's a kind of reverse IQ test for those he's meeting with. It doesn't say anything bad about his own. It might about theirs, if they have a problem with it. If he went totally naked, that would be different. But younger generations of workers are increasingly casual, and that's a world I for one welcome. Substance matters most.
rajpaul 14y ago
annoyed by a hoodie? they are going to make a mint from this deal. bankers win again :-)
Mz 14y ago
This is ridiculous. The whole thing. The way he dressed probably says none of the things they think. That is typical behavior for a self made man who had to actually create something of value to make a buck instead of having to do social jockeying to get hired. Different worlds. The bankers live in a monkey sphere where pecking order is incredibly important. Mark does not. "There is always room at the top" and all that.
nerdfiles 14y ago
Okay, look. I look like fucking Bob Marley, I just fucking do. This hair is a fucking baby, but makes me flow like Spike Spiegal. I am not kidding you. I wear what I wear because, quite frankly, I found most of it. And I'm not letting it go. It's my "brand" or whatever trash-jargon concept you wish to apply. And I develop web apps. (these realizations were documented in hindsight to the following:) (But just a tad before: I actually had a client ask, "So what's up with the hair?" This "style" occurs naturally. I do what I can with what I've accepted about my personal image and what I am willing to accept of it.) I took a job at Waste Management in Houston Corporate Headquaters with KF and BG. KF a hip, young but distinguished-looking 30-something, and BG another minority like me. We worked with git and I drew all sorts of nutty information architecture concepts upon a dry-erase board wall on the 17-th floor. Downtown Houston. We did front-end development. The teams wiped out now, after about a year. I believe I triggered part of that. And then they threw SharePoint at us. We were expected to devise a CSS system around trashy SilverLight modules and around some SilverLight developers bogus understanding of front-end considerations. And then the Enterprise CMS with no documentation and no "technical vision." Garbage. In a world like this, why should Zuckerberg care? Developers have seen the dirty laundry of these rotting industries, and they're going to wear it. The day it struck me is when I decided to take my morning stroll around the office, to strike up that Office Space tone for the day. So I could write my some-number-of-lines-of-code. My coffee was stale and depressing. As I turned the corner, a VP, along with others, about their own morning stroll, shouts at me, "Whoa! Hair!" You just can't fucking win with these fucking suits. I am preparing to compute in hostile climates (cold and hot climates, urban noisescapes, parking garages, etc.). I am preparing to compute in space.
adrianwaj 14y ago
To me the big story of this IPO is that Facebook execs are giving tacit approval to large amounts of pedophilia and hate material that exist on the site because for them to remove it, they'd have to acknowledge it exists first, and they feel this could turn off investors. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bcs6pIslv1A#t=662s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bcs6pIslv1A#t=662s (Pedophilia Groups Invade Facebook) And to think Mark actually single-handedly has the power to do something. Such poor character. And there's a ton of anti-semitic material too. Ewwww.
Tichy 14y ago
Why do companies put up with the 1-3% share of the bank for an IPO? What is the service the banks provide, and do they have more work if the IPO is bigger? Otherwise, why not give them a flat fee? I suppose Facebook could whip up a trading system for "virtual FB shares" on top of FB on a weekend, no need for banks and stock markets at all? Some lawyers to comply with regulations, though :-/ They already have their own currency, so presumably also an infrastructure for transactions and so on.

240 points by dean 14y ago

Zuckerburg is not annoying any bankers or the buyside, I assure you of that. The only people mentioning it are reporters and sell side analysts. (The guy he mentions in the article is a sell side analyst)

TDL 14y ago
Thank you. No one pays much attention to sell-side analysts. If I were one of the bankers on the FB deal I would be more surprised if Zuckerburg came to a meeting with a suit on.
- wtvanhest 14y ago
  Exactly. And if he had come in a suit people would have been saying that he cares so much about what "Wall Street" thinks that he must be "selling out" or even worse trying to get a higher than valuation than FB deserves etc.

bitdiddle 14y ago

must be a slow news day

joelrunyon 14y ago

I'm not a huge facebook fan, but I have to agree. Since when is wall street in a position to say "we need to be taken seriously" after all the crap they caused first hand to things for the sake of making money. Isn't all the faux-positioning and over-reverence to the banks the main problem with wall street anyway?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
ams6110 14y ago
Wall Street might take themselves more seriously if we had let them feel some pain from their mistakes. Instead we bailed them out, like a rich parent bails his spoiled kid out of jail after a DUI.
- cglace 14y ago
  Insert some comment about how our economy would have fallen into a death spiral if we hand't have bailed them out.

EternalFury 14y ago

What he wears should not matter, except he has a dress code for people who come interview for a job at Facebook. So, he certainly deserves a ribbing for believing he is above his own rules.

ceejayoz 14y ago
> So, he certainly deserves a ribbing for believing he is above his own rules. Clearly, he is. I'd imagine most of his employees don't get to hop on the private jet whenever they feel like it, either.
ojbyrne 14y ago
I'm curious about where you came up with this assertion. I interviewed at FB and nobody told me what to wear.
- joering2 14y ago
  thats funny; they told me to come to the prom night and didnt mention a thing about what to dress, but still I haven't came naked. just because they havent told doesn't necessarily mean you shouldnt have your own sense as of what to wear to work. if that would be me, and not seeing anyone how they really look at work inside fb, i would came with suit and tie and figure things out the first day.
  - gergles 14y ago
    If you would show up at Facebook wearing a suit and tie on your first day, they should probably fire you on the spot for being so utterly braindead as to not figure out any of their culture from your interview or from Internet research or from the "what's it like to work at Facebook" videos and pictures they have on their career site.
    - tomjen3 14y ago
      Actually a person could be wellknown by wearing a suit to work at Facebook. After all when all the non-conformist looks differently the same way, you need to do something different to stand out.

creamyhorror 14y ago

I like this quote from another CNet article on the Facebook IPO: ---- In the case of Facebook -- whose T-shirt-wearing, 27-year-old chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, is said to appreciate status updates more than stock brokers -- it's unlikely advisors will be able to command the standard rate. "These Valley types think this whole process could be automated and they don't have to pay 7 percent to these flashy, French-cufflink-wearing Wall Street types," said Eric Jackson, founder and managing member of Ironfire Capital, a technology-focused hedge fund, who has interacted professionally with executives at Facebook and other social-media companies. ---- I doubt the IPO process can be automated to any large degree (unless all the players somehow started thinking like engineers) but I'd sure be happy to see people try!

mazuhl 14y ago
From the other article on HN today it seems that they've tried to do some of that. They wrote their own pre-IPO prospectus and done the leg-work themselves on other things. It's not "automated", but it's cutting out a lot of what those finance companies would have done.
pbhjpbhj 14y ago
>I doubt the IPO process can be automated to any large degree Why? What's so complicated about it?
- creamyhorror 14y ago
  I don't know much about it, but it does mainly seem to be about business and social relationships, due diligence, negotiation, accounting, and marketing with a compelling pitchbook or whatever they call it. It doesn't seem so much like a target for automation so much as a target for "pro-competitive intervention" (which is very unlikely to happen).
- chernevik 14y ago
  Stocks generally don't trade on purely quantitative analysis, but on investor assessments of their 'story' and how that will play out over time. If you think corporations are going to invest in networking gear you look at Cisco et al. You inspect that universe for management (good or bad?) / product (great? promising new stuff? obsoleting?) / financial stories (leverage? balance sheet clarity?), and for valuation (P / E, enterprise value to EBITDA). If you think someone's valuation is low given the stories you believe, you buy. For seasoned stocks a market consensus about the relevant stories emerge, and events within those stories drive the trading moves. People making money by being the first to adopt or drop stories. But an IPO has no market-consensus stories of its own. So the book-building process involves explaining the company and getting market feedback on the credibility of that story. Now this may or may not make sense. But it does give management some feeling of relationship with the market, by which they can hear what investors think and possibly influence those perceptions. Given the importance of stock price to most managements, it would be a very bold team that went forward without any perceived tool for managing the process.

antidaily 14y ago

Aren't people reading a little too much into this? He probably owns one suit and forgot to get it pressed.

jbooth 14y ago

I've got a question for the repeated assertions that "JP morgan / GS / etc repaid their bailout money"... They only repaid that money because the bailed-out AIG paid off their credit default swaps, right? So isn't it only true in the most narrow sense that they paid it back, considering that the gov't totally ate it on AIG?

tedunangst 14y ago
Yes, but if you want to take a narrow view, you can't blame Chase for AIG's mistakes. "Bailout" money is tracked in the account of the entity that receives it, but I don't think it's reasonable to continue tracing it as it moves around. Bailout dollars are just as green as regular dollars. If someone at Chase buys a car with bailout dollars, then the car salesman buys lunch with his commission, are you going to claw back the bailout dollars from the waiter? Debts are owed by the people who receive the money, not the guy left holding the hot potato.
- jbooth 14y ago
  Sure you can. You buy a bond, you're not guaranteed 4% interest, you're gambling that the entity who's indebted to you will still be around long enough to pay you. Same with these credit default swaps. If the government doesn't step in, AIG folds and Chase doesn't get paid for those CDS contracts. Nobody paid the government back for AIG.
  - tedunangst 14y ago
    And the government insured AIG. that doesn't move the debt from AIG's books to Chase's books.
    - jbooth 14y ago
      The government did not back those credit default swaps, until they did of course. But the fact that the government stood behind other forms of insurance at AIG doesn't mean that they were obligated to pay back the CDSs. Again, until they did so after the fact.

grumps 14y ago

I don't like either (FB or Wall Street). I will enjoy watch the two fight it out.

tatsuke95 14y ago

>"He's in a position most of us who have scrambled to find obscure documents in order to get a mortgage dream about: Telling a bunch of bankers to take it or leave it." Um, banks are no different than your auto mechanic. They want and are competing for your business. You can always tell them take it or leave it. People seem to have this bizarre mentality that you have to go begging to your bank for money, which is hardly the case. Personal business like mortgages and chequing accounts, and for that matter things as large as an IPO, are hyper-competitive. There is a lot of room to shop around. What is it about banking that people find so intimidating and confusing?

revorad 14y ago
To put it mildly, there are more auto mechanics than banks.
ArekDymalski 14y ago
Exactly. Bankers aren't 'giving you money'. They're just providing simple service, for a fee.
joelrunyon 14y ago
I think the point was that unlike a lot of situations many Americans find themselves in, when going up against a bank, Zuckerberg has leverage - not a lot of people can say that these days (there are a lot more average people applying for mortgages than there are Facebooks applying for IPOs).
- excuse-me 14y ago
  Actually at the moment you are probably in a lot better position than the bank - you have money which you are prepared to lend them at a very low rate of interest. Similarly when you take out a mortgage - your interest is paying their salaries. It's a service industry and the bank manager is your servant. The only different these days is that you are probably in a much better financial state than the bank!
  - 14y ago

anotherthrow 14y ago

So Mark Zuckerberg wears the regulation silicon valley uniform to a meeting with bankers wearing their regulation wall street uniform? I'm not sure what the interesting content to this story is, but would be happy to be enlightened!

dasil003 14y ago

An investment banker annoyed by Zuckerberg wearing a hoodie is equally impotent to someone who can't wait to see Zuckerberg "stick it to the bankers". Focus on stuff that matters.

septerr 14y ago

Suits are so passé.

tomgallard 14y ago

I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that I think he's being rude and arrogant. Yes, he's in a position of power, and could turn up to his meetings wearing only a cunningly positioned silk scarf, and it would have no effect on the banks' willingness to earn lots of money from overseeing the Facebook IPO. But when you're in a position of power you also have a responsibility not to be a dick. I realize dress codes etc are a bit different over there in the US, but at work here I normally dress pretty casually. However, if someone's coming in for interview, I will wear a suit. As I know the candidate's going to turn up in a suit, and it will make them feel uncomfortable if I'm interviewing them in shorts and a t-shirt. The person in the position of power has a moral obligation not to make everyone else feel uncomfortable or stupid. A great example of this is Queen Victoria drinking from her finger-bowl after one of her guests did - in order to save them from any embarassment or discomfort (http://www.bobssermons.com/sermons/archive/030831.htm http://www.bobssermons.com/sermons/archive/030831.htm). And yes, bankers have acted arrogantly, and swanned around like they own the place too long. But its hardly a great example to set to just start doing the same yourself as soon as the balance of power tilts.

mbesto 14y ago
I can't disagree more. But when you're in a position of power you also have a responsibility not to be a dick. Say's who? The greatest minds of our day challenge status quo's, not accept them. "Dress" has historically been a badge of status, which has historically been inherited. I think the big "F U" that Mark is trying to portray (much like Jobs) is that his meritocracy wins. Bureaucrats wear suits, Meritocrats wear hoodies.
- mcknz 14y ago
  The true test (if all this even matters) will be to see how he carries himself if Facebook ever needs investor money for its survival.
- tomgallard 14y ago
  So if the bankers started wearing hoodies they'll become Meritocratic? Portraying 'not wearing a suit' as challenging the status quo is a bit of an exaggeration. Maybe Gandhi challenged the status quo with his choice of outfit, but a billionaire turning up to a meeting in a suit is hardly sticking it to the man. I think it works both ways incidentally- if the banker is coming to your place of work, and you all wear hoodies and shorts, he should make an effort to dress casually too.

DanI-S 14y ago

The idea that here, in the 21st century, any successful entrepreneur must garb oneself in rarely-worn, extremely expensive and generally inconvenient Victorian-era ceremonial dress in order to arrange a business transaction is utterly ludicrous. I'm most effective when I'm at my most confident, and I'm most confident when wearing the clothing that I am used to wearing every day. That might be a suit, and it might be the affordable and well-designed utility clothing that 99% of humanity wears. If it's good enough to wear whilst creating a company worth billions of dollars, it's good enough to wear whilst selling it.

oconnore 14y ago
> rarely-worn, extremely expensive and generally inconvenient Victorian-era ceremonial dress This annoys me. The 'dev-uniform' of t-shirt, jeans and sneakers is just as constraining as the 'business-uniform' of suits and button downs. You rarely wear one, they are not necessarily expensive, and they are not inconvenient. Basically, there is nothing inherently better about jeans and a t-shirt, and nothing inherently bad about suits or anything else that isn't in either category. The key is to not expect others to comply to your weird ideas about dress code and let everyone express themselves without stereotyping them.
- muhfuhkuh 14y ago
  "Basically, there is nothing inherently better about jeans and a t-shirt" More comfortable, more durable, cheaper, better selection of comfortable footwear that doesn't need servicing by a person at the airport or the main floor of an office building... need I go on?
  - oconnore 14y ago
    My suit is very comfortable. It doesn't fall apart. I paid under $100 for an entire outfit (I paid $120 for my jeans sans t-shirt). My shoes are super comfy and I've never had to get them serviced?
    - 14y ago

loverobots 14y ago

The bankers might return the favor with downgrades and other stuff soon enough (and yes, he will have to care once the stock goes down, no matter what he says). Some occasions call for slippers, others for khakis and others for a suit and tie. Wear an ill fitting suit to show that you're not comfortable in one if want, but wear a freaking suit. You're asking strangers to buy with their hard earned money about $10 billion of your $100 billion pie. Show some respect for the occasion.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

phillmv 14y ago

>"Mark and his signature hoodie: He's actually showing investors he doesn't care that much; he's going to be him. I think that's a mark of immaturity," Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter complained to Bloomberg's Mark Milian. "I think that he has to realize he's bringing investors in as a new constituency right now, and I think he's got to show them the respect that they deserve because he's asking them for their money." Christ, what an asshole. It's a negotiation tactic, one many of us use in interviews: by flaunting social convention and dressing down, you're signaling that you have leverage. Mark is the one being wooed, and not the other way around. By whining about it in the press it just makes it sound like this fellow just isn't used to being the lowest status person in the room.

joering2 14y ago
He wasn't an asshole. Mark is 27 years old. How old is the Wall Street and banking system in this country? Its older than his parents! Bankers are evil, but if you come for money you better show them respect because they rule the game and hold most of chips. I agree with author. Fun time is over! FB needs to show profits and prove to stockholders that its worth their money. Coming in hoodie helps publicity, but that's it. It tells average Facebook yuppie "oh Mark is "selling" but hey he still is himself so everything is fine". FB and internet is still too young to figure itself out. This could be bubble. FB can go down like anything that was trendy in its time. I think buying Instagram for that much money shows how desperately scared Mark is. He was incredibly lucky that Instagram owners didnt turn out to be another Mark and say "we don't sell" and keep building momentum. My sisters that are trendoholics switched from reading "boring" (according to them) Facebook updates and messages to taking snapshots and limited wording on Insta. Trend is moving beyond FB and Mark knows it! Next time when FB wants to buy something overtaking the net, they may hear "no, thank you".
- romaniv 14y ago
  if you come for money you better show them respect Okay, so he didn't. What are they going to do? Complain about it? Anyway, ethics is about what people should do. If you switch to discussing what people can get away with because of power, you're no longer discussing ethics. If you switch back and forth, using "what X can get away with" standard for people with power and "what they should do" for everyone else, then there is something wrong with your argument.

elorant 14y ago

Even the almighty Steve Jobs when visited a Nobel award ceremony wore a tie. Bottom line it all depends on the importance of the event. You can't demand respect, you can only earn it. And the bankers haven't earn it a bit.

kthakar3 14y ago
I agree. Zuck wore a tie and suit for the Obama dinner.

rbucks 14y ago

Has anyone ever seen Steve Jobs where a suit and tie?

16BitTons 14y ago
http://www.kitguru.net/apple/carl/why-did-steve-jobs-wear-turtlenecks/ http://www.kitguru.net/apple/carl/why-did-steve-jobs-wear-tu...

hristov 14y ago

Big f-ing deal. This is basically a puff piece. I don't think he is annoying the bankers, at this point everyone expects him to wear a hoodie. If he really wanted to annoy the bankers he would have done google style Dutch auction ipo. The bankers really hated that.

cmillllllls 14y ago

He got this far wearing a hoodie, why wear a tie now?

excuse-me 14y ago

Of course if he was a real maverick he would tell the bankers and the stock market to stuff it. He has more customers on his site than the Nasdaq has share buyers/sellers. If he decided to reinvent stock markets and simply sell shares directly to facebook members then you would see some panic! After all if shares are all traded electronically why do we need a room full of scrolling displays pretending to be ticker tape and opened by a bell? Why not have buying and selling shares in any company a feature of facebook ?

frabcus 14y ago
At last! There are good reasons, but they're all regulatory, and there are workarounds. Let's have some proper disruption of the finance industry, please. Now!
johnyzee 14y ago
Exactly. I was a lot more impressed by Larry and Sergei's IPO, where they really gave a fat middle finger to the Street. Who gives a fuck about a hoodie. This is just a branding exercise to show how 'real' Mark Zuckerberg is and I would be surprised if there wasn't some high-powered PR people involved in shaping his public image, including the whole hoodie thing and training him in public speaking (and possibly placing fawning stories like this one).
Tichy 14y ago
I had the same idea. I think FB even has all the infrastructure in place already. They have Facebook coins, virtual goods, transactions. Shares could be just another virtual good.

heyrhett 14y ago

"My name is Barack Obama, and I'm the guy that got Mark to wear a jacket and tie." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/mark-zuckerberg-wears-tie-jeans-obama-interview_n_851746.html#s267561 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/mark-zuckerberg-wea...

RyLuke 14y ago

"Clothing is the outward expression of a man’s state of mind. It is his attire that tells the world what he thinks of himself." -Pearl Binder "Dressing conscientiously is exalting in the act of being alive." -Gay Talese It doesn't much matter what Zuckerberg signals or doesn't signal to Wall Street bankers by wearing a hoodie. It won't have a material impact on his company's offering. Coco Chanel used to say that one shouldn't leave the house without putting some effort into one's appearance -- if only out of politeness. It is, after all, the rest of us who have to look at you. The most unfortunate part of this story is that Zuckerberg fails to realize -- or care -- that a little sartorial attention imparts respect for the people with whom you are doing business, both personally and professionally. Whether he likes it or not, Zuck is now a high profile individual, with all the attention that follows suit. That's, in my mind, an opportunity to think critically about how he presents himself aesthetically. Contrary to what most posters here seem to think, fashion isn't binary: there are more choices than a hoodie and jeans or a suit. Putting some effort into his appearance doesn't mean he has to look like, or imply endorsement of, Wall Street bankers. If anything, purposefully flaunting that convention is the opposite side of the same coin.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

oz 14y ago

I'm as sartorial as they come. My friends call me 'Swagnificent'; I typically wore tailored, French-cuff shirts, a fedora and suits to my former job as a sysadmin at a Big 4 firm. People regularly stop me on the street and ask to take pictures of me. TL;DR, I'm all for dressing up. But something about this delights me. Imagine, walking into a room of self-indulgent, Wall Street pricks, knowing that they're tripping over themselves to get in on the action. I think I'd be tempted to rub it in. Ordinarily, someone approaches a bank out of their own necessity. Here, the tables have turned. And I love it. Wasn't there a story a few years back about Microsoft calling Zuck for conference call at 9AM, and he told them he was still sleeping; and to call back?

kemiller 14y ago
Dressing well as a sysadmin is an act of rebellion. ;)
- oz 14y ago
  Touche :)
- blasdel 14y ago
  it can also be pathetic: http://achewood.com/index.php?date=11012004 http://achewood.com/index.php?date=11012004
atonse 14y ago
I'm similar and I too got the same amount of pleasure reading this. Wall Street investors don't have any principles. The only thing they care about is how much money you make for them. Zuck could've shown up naked and they would've still jumped all over each other to invest in Facebook. And this idiot who complained that Zuck underdressed - if he doesn't invest because of that, and the stock skyrockets, you think he's still going to have his job? Doubt it. He'd be out on the street wearing a hoodie.
- oz 14y ago
  >if he doesn't invest because of that, and the stock skyrockets, you think he's still going to have his job? Doubt it. He'd be out on the street wearing a hoodie. That, my dear friend, would be priceless.

creamyhorror 14y ago

The Wikioracle tells us: --- Western business wear is standard in many workplaces around the globe, even in countries where the usual daily wear may be a distinctive national costume. Some non-Western businesspeople will wear national costume nonetheless. A Saudi Arabian sheikh may wear the traditional robes and headdress to an international conference; United Arab Emirates diplomats in particular are noted for attending conventions of the United Nations General Assembly in full keffiyeh and thawb. Diplomats of the People's Republic of China are similarly noted for wearing the Mao suit to international events; Indian leaders often wear Nehru jackets, with Manmohan Singh wearing a suit-like combination including such a jacket with his Sikh turban. Wearing national costume in such contexts can proclaim national pride, or just extremely high status which allows the wearer to defy convention. --- Indeed, maybe that's what's happening here: the corporate chieftain showing his power among those in the room. Let Zuckerberg peacock; he is within his full rights to. Does a client have to dress however his banker does?

georgemcbay 14y ago

Anyone who follows the console gaming market will instantly recognize Michael Pachter as a first-class media troll that says ridiculous things to get his name mentioned in articles. It would probably be better to just ignore this guy instead of playing into him.

ggchappell 14y ago

There's an unspoken assumption behind all this, that I'm wondering about. So, FB is having the usual IPO roadshow, but they're not doing it quite as expected. My question: Why are they having the roadshow at all? Instead they could have done a few interviews with major business magazines (which I believe they did), put out what amounts to an annual report, to get people information, maybe even had a special hotshot-analyst-only webpage for submitting questions about strategy & what not. What does the roadshow get them that the above wouldn't have? The only things I can think of are time & money spent, and lots of headaches.

readme 14y ago

Awesome. I take this as a sign things are changing. I can't wait to see the day when technology companies are the top of the food chain, and bankers are second.

zerostar07 14y ago

Did this guy just type 2 pages about a hoodie? (and 167 people found this interesting?)

12uu45dd 14y ago

Microsoft made him wealthy. People became amazed and dazed, willing to give him more money. Good on him for not caring. FU money. He suckered Microsoft and that's enough. He's set for life. But it's not the hoodie, it's who's in it. If he's rejected by investment bankers, it's not because he wore a hoodie. It's because of who he is. Wearing hoodies to meetings is but one very small part.

rottyguy 14y ago

Zuck is about to step into (F*ck You Money ^ N) so what else would you expect?

SkyMarshal 14y ago

We're Facebook. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits.

danteembermage 14y ago

The average IPO proceeds for the past two decades have never exceeded 100 million and have been hovering around 70 for a while. At 3% that means the typical cut is $2.1 million or less. Facebook plans to raise $11.8 billion, which at 1% would be $118 million. Compensation of fifty times normal implied by the 1% figure thrown out in the article still seems pretty high.

mkramlich 14y ago

What Zuckerberg chooses to wear to a meeting with bankers should not matter at all. If anything it's a kind of reverse IQ test for those he's meeting with. It doesn't say anything bad about his own. It might about theirs, if they have a problem with it. If he went totally naked, that would be different. But younger generations of workers are increasingly casual, and that's a world I for one welcome. Substance matters most.

rajpaul 14y ago

annoyed by a hoodie? they are going to make a mint from this deal. bankers win again :-)

Mz 14y ago

This is ridiculous. The whole thing. The way he dressed probably says none of the things they think. That is typical behavior for a self made man who had to actually create something of value to make a buck instead of having to do social jockeying to get hired. Different worlds. The bankers live in a monkey sphere where pecking order is incredibly important. Mark does not. "There is always room at the top" and all that.

nerdfiles 14y ago

Okay, look. I look like fucking Bob Marley, I just fucking do. This hair is a fucking baby, but makes me flow like Spike Spiegal. I am not kidding you. I wear what I wear because, quite frankly, I found most of it. And I'm not letting it go. It's my "brand" or whatever trash-jargon concept you wish to apply. And I develop web apps. (these realizations were documented in hindsight to the following:) (But just a tad before: I actually had a client ask, "So what's up with the hair?" This "style" occurs naturally. I do what I can with what I've accepted about my personal image and what I am willing to accept of it.) I took a job at Waste Management in Houston Corporate Headquaters with KF and BG. KF a hip, young but distinguished-looking 30-something, and BG another minority like me. We worked with git and I drew all sorts of nutty information architecture concepts upon a dry-erase board wall on the 17-th floor. Downtown Houston. We did front-end development. The teams wiped out now, after about a year. I believe I triggered part of that. And then they threw SharePoint at us. We were expected to devise a CSS system around trashy SilverLight modules and around some SilverLight developers bogus understanding of front-end considerations. And then the Enterprise CMS with no documentation and no "technical vision." Garbage. In a world like this, why should Zuckerberg care? Developers have seen the dirty laundry of these rotting industries, and they're going to wear it. The day it struck me is when I decided to take my morning stroll around the office, to strike up that Office Space tone for the day. So I could write my some-number-of-lines-of-code. My coffee was stale and depressing. As I turned the corner, a VP, along with others, about their own morning stroll, shouts at me, "Whoa! Hair!" You just can't fucking win with these fucking suits. I am preparing to compute in hostile climates (cold and hot climates, urban noisescapes, parking garages, etc.). I am preparing to compute in space.

adrianwaj 14y ago

To me the big story of this IPO is that Facebook execs are giving tacit approval to large amounts of pedophilia and hate material that exist on the site because for them to remove it, they'd have to acknowledge it exists first, and they feel this could turn off investors. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bcs6pIslv1A#t=662s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bcs6pIslv1A#t=662s (Pedophilia Groups Invade Facebook) And to think Mark actually single-handedly has the power to do something. Such poor character. And there's a ton of anti-semitic material too. Ewwww.

Tichy 14y ago

Why do companies put up with the 1-3% share of the bank for an IPO? What is the service the banks provide, and do they have more work if the IPO is bigger? Otherwise, why not give them a flat fee? I suppose Facebook could whip up a trading system for "virtual FB shares" on top of FB on a weekend, no need for banks and stock markets at all? Some lawyers to comply with regulations, though :-/ They already have their own currency, so presumably also an infrastructure for transactions and so on.