homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 50.17.79.35
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google Finance, Govt, Policy and Business Issues
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: goodroi

Google Finance, Govt, Policy and Business Issues Forum

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 45 ( 1 [2]     
Google IPO to be Unique
G keeps 'em guessing to the very end
Brett_Tabke




msg:1235438
 12:07 pm on Apr 27, 2004 (gmt 0)

Sounds like we might actually have a shot at buying some stock in this one:

[sfgate.com...]

Google Inc. of Mountain View will structure its
much-anticipated initial public offering of stock in a way that will give an unusually broad range of investors a chance to compete for some of its IPO shares, according to an investment banker familiar with the company's plans.

 

loanuniverse




msg:1235468
 10:47 pm on Apr 27, 2004 (gmt 0)

Trying to decide if the market is right for IPO is an art not a science. One thing I can say is that a lot of people are lined up to buy a couple of thousand worth of Google shares {myself included}. The demand is there... Of course the buying will be subject to reading the filings.

"Economists have forecasted 9 out of the last 5 recessions."

Teknorat




msg:1235469
 11:53 pm on Apr 27, 2004 (gmt 0)

Just out of curiosity how many here will be grabbing G-shares if they get the chance? I know I will.

258cib




msg:1235470
 12:53 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Just out of curiosity how many here will be grabbing G-shares if they get the chance? I know I will.

At what price per share? You going to value Google like Yahoo? I would not. As a search firm, Google rocks, but Yahoo is everywhere on the net.

258cib




msg:1235471
 1:01 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Brett said:
Google never has been conventional.

I think Brett's point may be that the forces that impact Google's value might, to a large degree, start becoming outside of Google's control for the first time.

That is to say, it's not how smart G is or isn't any more, but if G is the where things are bought and sold via the web to a large degree (see Bambi's column where a case is made for that), the economic forces become a factor. Which is to say, Google becomes conventional at least in that the same forces that affect you and I and our neighbors will also impact Google.

Therefore, the question on the value of Google is: Is the internet's growth or potential starting to peak?

One sign that it is: Google is doing an IPO.

gopi




msg:1235472
 1:52 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> Just out of curiosity how many here will be grabbing G-shares if they get the chance? I know I will.

Whatever the price i may grab say 100 shares just for the heck of it - may order a physical share certificate and frame it as a personal collection ...afterall google have made a small fortune for many of us :)

grelmar




msg:1235473
 2:44 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

So what exactly does Google need the banks for? Can somebody explain please?

An IPO is complicated, even for someone with as wide an appeal as Google. One of the main factors, though, will be that google will need an intermediary just to handle all the money. Literally. You don't just move hundreds of millions around at the flick of a switch, despite what some bad Hollywood might indicate.

otherwise:

Am I the only person left on the planet too cautious to buy into a tech IPO?

I like google, as a search engine, and as a convenient way to place some ads. But as a company I'd invest in? Not even with someone else's money. Here's a brief list why:

Secrecy:
I can understand why companies are big on secrecy, but I would never invest in a company that's as shrouded as Google. Earnings/Margin just aren't enough info to go on. Those numbers are way too easy to tinker with and obscure (Enron anyone?) I wanna know nuts and bolts. How much real-estate they own, (or do they lease office space?) How many employees? What's their average capital outlay on equipment for the last 5 years? How much of that outlay is in technology that depreciates in the real world faster than it does on your tax returns? I could go on for days here on vital info that Google just isn't sharing with the outside world.

Image
Image can make or break a company. Managing your corporate image is a fine art. And without discussing the wisdom or lack thereof of some of Google's recent moves (Gmail, arbitrary changes to AdWords, etc), these were moves that were bound to be controversial. Controversial going into an IPO is not where any company wants to be. You want to be carefully styling your established image, keeping your known strengths right at the front of everyone's mind. Google, as a corporation, just doesn't grasp this, and it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how corporate image is used and managed. Again, this just cranks up the risk factor.

Google is God, but so was Zeus, once...
And tech is a lot more mobile than religion. M$ is moving into search, Yahoo is refining their search strategy, AOL is tinkering with their search again, and even lowering some of its "garden walls" to allow outside netizens into some of the closed world that was once only available to the anointed paying members of AOL. Niche engines for scientific research are gaining ground, other "older" players in the search game are consolodating, merging technologies, and retrenching. In a landscape that can change as fast as the net, is Google going to be king of the hill forever? And even if they do remain the "dominant" search engine, they can still lose an increasing chunk of the market to an ever growing range of competitors.

There's too much tech Venture Capital, and not enough solid Tech to buy into.
In economic terms, this is known as "overhang," and its a very serious factor in the tech industry right now. One of the hold-overs from the bubble burst, is that there are a bunch of venture capital firms left out there with BILLIONS of dollars total in their funds, and not a whole lot of places to put it. Something like Google comes along, and all of the sudden they have some place to put it that their fund investors aren't likely to complain about. Also, just with the general hype around Google, there are a LOT of people out there looking to buy in right off the bat, and this could easily drive the price of the stock way past any proportion to the actual value of the company.

And there's more reasons out there why I'm not in the rush to sign up for Google stocks. Is there a chance I'll be kicking myself in a few years for not getting in on this? Of course there is. But my inner conservative rebels against the thought of putting money into any company with the above listed (potential) liabilities.

SlyOldDog




msg:1235474
 8:02 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hi Grelmar

Nice points. I'd just like to add to those a little.

- There is no need for Google to seek out investors with hundreds of millions of dollars. If they go for wide-held ownership (say 1 million investors), the average holding might be 10,000 to 20,000 dollars. I see no reason why this needs to be handled by an investment bank. Typically the bank fees for an IPO for a firm Google's size can run into hundreds of millions of dollars. Most of that money is paid for the book-building process (finding investors), and underwriting (insuring) the IPO. I see no reason Google needs either of those services since the IPO is a sure-fire success.

- Secrecy: I would not be too concerned about the realestate and tangible assets Google owns. If you are coughing up 18 billion for the company, what can the assets be worth? A few hundred million tops. 95% of Google's value is intangible, and as you point out very well in your following arguments, that value is questionable.

Michael Anthony




msg:1235475
 8:47 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

grelmar, your post is the only one in this string which shows a good grasp of the basics of equity investment. As a former member of the London Stock Exchange and an investment banker myself for many years, I was amused by the rather naive comments that had preceded your post.

For anyone looking to invest in this IPO, read grelmar's post, think about what he says, and then if you're still convinced, go write your checks. The people at the Googleplex are the current stockmarket flavour of the month - they know that, their investment bankers have confirmed that and they're no fools. Just like car dealers marking up their soft-top sportscars in the spring, G has been told the time is right to maximise their share price.

For me, property is still a better investment. I'm not saying that you won't make money, but I am saying that there are safer, less bumpy rides available for those with spare cash to invest.

yump




msg:1235476
 11:54 am on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Prediction 1:
Google IPO will be like a 1999 small investor stock scramble. Its liked and known by so many people, who have no idea how to value a company. To the seasoned investors (big ones), its nothing special and they will coldly ride it up and then sell out. Just money.

Googles future growth (even 5 years worth) is irrelevant if the share price starts artificially inflated because the growth is already accounted for in the share price.

My previous prediction:
(in 1999)
I will be able to retire on the back of the share price rises in tech stocks.

Still working for a living ;-)

So prediction 1 might not happen. Do bears.....?

gethan




msg:1235477
 12:36 pm on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Very interesting situation, I won't be buying, I think even if I wanted to, I'd be out bid in no time.

> investment banker ... naive comments...

What were your opinions of the niave comments made by investment bankers back in 99? Just wondering.

Iraq in relation to Google IPO:

I think Brett was using it to draw parallels to the early 1970's, along with all the other economic indicators.

Property a better investment:

In the UK - can anyone spell bubble?

mquarles




msg:1235478
 1:17 pm on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

For me, property is still a better investment.

For me, my own business is the best investment. Of course, Google IS going to get a decent hunk of that through AdWords.

No stock for me; but I'll invest $ in their ads.

MQ

SlyOldDog




msg:1235479
 11:01 pm on Apr 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>As a former member of the London Stock Exchange and an investment banker myself for many years, I was amused by the rather naive comments that had preceded your post.

hmmm. Yes. Well...

Actually most of the comments are pretty much on a par with the investo-babble you can read from the professionals in the average investment magazine. All that is missing is P/E ratios and discounted cash flow guestimates.

In my opinion investment bankers and financial commentators over estimate their importance and their knowledge of financial markets. In fact most professional commentators cannot even agree on where the market will be in 12 months. I am often amused when I read their theory-du-jour.

So, to add another naiive idea: I'd love to see Google launch an internet auction for their shares, for settlement in e-cash only :) - especially if it was GoogleCash and they maintaned the secondary market on the net after the launch.

Michael Anthony




msg:1235480
 8:00 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Yes, very fair points. Whilst I was at one very high profile fund management company, they ran a test with the fund managers pitting their skills against some monkeys throwing darts at Financial Times stock listings. Of course, the monkeys won!

So yeah, I guess you guys are as likely as any person or monkey to get this right :)

SlyOldDog




msg:1235481
 9:43 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

How did they get the monkeys to throw the darts at the FT? Was there a picture of George Bush on the page?

Michael Anthony




msg:1235482
 9:50 am on Apr 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I was unfortunately not present at the aforementioned monkey darts event, but I understand that it took some time and a good deal of coercion to get them to throw them in the right direction and not at the fund managers. Guess the monkeys must have already taken a bath on their own personal investments!

p.s. Not having a moan here, but I would have to put my hand up and say that we've let this thread wander just slightly off topic!

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 45 ( 1 [2]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google Finance, Govt, Policy and Business Issues
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved