linkedin ipo

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
manuvns
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:30 pm

linkedin ipo

Post by manuvns » Thu May 19, 2011 10:10 am

linkedin stocks are up 90% in first day of trading . Did any bogleheads get to participate in this ipo and make some quick bucks ? How can i participate in in similiar ipo ?

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=LNKD&ql=1

jebmke
Posts: 7898
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:44 pm

Post by jebmke » Thu May 19, 2011 10:19 am

You could start your own venture capital fund.
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

User avatar
kenyan
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:16 am

Post by kenyan » Thu May 19, 2011 10:25 am

The stock is up 90%...is there a way the public could have actually earned that?

"It began trading Thursday on New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol LNKD (LNKD). Shares began trading at $83 each and quickly rose above $90, before falling back a bit to $85.97 at 10:30 a.m. ET."


http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/19/technol ... htm?hpt=T2

User avatar
norookie
Posts: 3016
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:55 pm

Post by norookie » Thu May 19, 2011 10:25 am

:D Open a account @ Scottrade, TDAmeritrade, or the like and go right ahead. Its quite simple. No I did not buy any and right now i'd sell had I purchased any.~ (I'm not affiliated with either brokerage)
" Wealth usually leads to excess " Cicero 55 b.c

User avatar
simplesimon
Posts: 3100
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:53 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post by simplesimon » Thu May 19, 2011 10:28 am

I will paypal anybody $5 that can show me they purchased the stock at $45/share.

Tuxx
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:19 am

Post by Tuxx » Thu May 19, 2011 10:30 am

Turned on CNBC, the pom poms are out. Having 1999 flashbacks.

jebmke
Posts: 7898
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:44 pm

Post by jebmke » Thu May 19, 2011 10:34 am

Tuxx wrote:Turned on CNBC, the pom poms are out. Having 1999 flashbacks.
does have that feel, doesn't it. What will they call it -- the twit bubble?
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

User avatar
CrankyManager
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 10:12 am
Location: Nebraska

Post by CrankyManager » Thu May 19, 2011 10:36 am

jebmke wrote:
Tuxx wrote:Turned on CNBC, the pom poms are out. Having 1999 flashbacks.
does have that feel, doesn't it. What will they call it -- the twit bubble?
The Social Bubble? The 'Not'working Bubble?
"Does not Dionysius seem to have made it sufficiently clear that there can be nothing happy for the person over whom some fear always looms?" -- Cicero

Tuxx
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:19 am

Post by Tuxx » Thu May 19, 2011 10:49 am

Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Flickr, Pingasta, Ryze, Zooppa, etc, etc will suck up even more liquity when they IPO.

Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr will likely be in the top 10 IPOs of all time and they will probably roll out in the next 12-15 months, if not sooner after seeing how Linkin was received.

Manbaerpig
Posts: 1368
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 2:32 am
Location: San Jose

Post by Manbaerpig » Thu May 19, 2011 10:59 am

I thought you had to be a client already of the firm that took them public to have access to the IPO price?

in other words, the real play for the public was buying at 83 and selling at 90 or so?

unless it turns out like a GOOG...

matt
Posts: 2305
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:47 pm

Post by matt » Thu May 19, 2011 11:18 am

If you own it, you should probably sell today. Membership on LinkedIn is going to decline materially following the rapture.

User avatar
kenyan
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:16 am

Post by kenyan » Thu May 19, 2011 11:20 am

matt wrote:If you own it, you should probably sell today. Membership on LinkedIn is going to decline materially following the rapture.
We still have tomorrow as well!

bigDanShan
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:34 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Post by bigDanShan » Thu May 19, 2011 11:20 am

Net Income (pro rated annualized): $8 million or P/E 980x +
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." – Plato

User avatar
kenyan
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:16 am

Post by kenyan » Thu May 19, 2011 11:21 am

Aren't there some IPOs that don't allow you to sell for some period of time afterwards? Is this one of them?

Note - I know very little about IPOs, so forgive my ignorance.

Snowjob
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:53 pm

Post by Snowjob » Thu May 19, 2011 12:14 pm

Tried to short this mulitple times around 105 and 110 today but I keep getting error messages from IB "no contracts available to short"

riverguy
Posts: 352
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:33 pm

Post by riverguy » Thu May 19, 2011 12:25 pm

Just another scam job by the investment banks. Look how much money the company left on the table. What do you bet they will take the over-allotment?:D

As far as an 8 billion dollar company? Good luck with that. Linkedin will be another fad that comes and goes. Hello 1999. Hello Myspace.

FredPeterson
Posts: 1025
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Post by FredPeterson » Thu May 19, 2011 12:25 pm

kenyan wrote:Aren't there some IPOs that don't allow you to sell for some period of time afterwards? Is this one of them?

Note - I know very little about IPOs, so forgive my ignorance.
If you received shares as part of the IPO process as an insider yes, you are locked in. That lock in is usually something like 6 months or more.

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 12:30 pm

Best the general public could buy in at was around $85... So there was no 90% gains..

Still, there is obviously some money to make from the "greater fools"... It's trading at a 500-1000 PE ratio right now...

That's completely insane, but there are obviously some very stupid people out there... It's definitely not a long-term holding..

Facebook would be an interesting gamble... Buy and sell the same day to the bigger idiots out there...

I think I'll pass though.

FredPeterson
Posts: 1025
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Post by FredPeterson » Thu May 19, 2011 12:32 pm

riverguy wrote:Just another scam job by the investment banks. Look how much money the company left on the table. What do you bet they will take the over-allotment?:D

As far as an 8 billion dollar company? Good luck with that. Linkedin will be another fad that comes and goes. Hello 1999. Hello Myspace.
No, LinkedIn is not a fad and it will not go away.

But its not even a $1B market cap company thats for sure. With revenue of $8m? Even at a high growth PE of 50 we'll say, thats only a cap of $400M

xerty24
Posts: 4827
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Post by xerty24 » Thu May 19, 2011 1:09 pm

Snowjob wrote:Tried to short this mulitple times around 105 and 110 today but I keep getting error messages from IB "no contracts available to short"
You should know that IPOs are unshortable for 30 days. Blame the SEC, not IB - they want to encourage the bubbles in new stocks apparently by making it illegal to have the opposite opinion.

Bruin
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:43 pm

Post by Bruin » Thu May 19, 2011 1:11 pm

It's only at 106 now, spiked at 122.70. Here's what I don't get. Doesn't this just mean the investment bank that IPO'd the stock did a piss poor job?

I mean if I was the Linkedin CEO, and the company sold 7.84 million shares at $45 each, but the market priced them at $106 each, didn't the company just get screwed out of $478,000,000? That $478,000,000 went to the preferred customers of the investment bank that took Linkedin public. I know the CEO is probably happy personally, since his paper value in the company is now worth >$200 million.

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 1:14 pm

Bruin wrote:It's only at 106 now, spiked at 122.70. Here's what I don't get. Doesn't this just mean the investment bank that IPO'd the stock did a piss poor job?

I mean if I was the Linkedin CEO, and the company sold 7.84 million shares at $45 each, but the market priced them at $106 each, didn't the company just get screwed out of $478,000,000? That $478,000,000 went to the preferred customers of the investment bank that took Linkedin public. I know the CEO is probably happy personally, since his paper value in the company is now worth >$200 million.
Yeah, but it's not really worth that much.. By the time those people who got in before the IPO can actually sell their shares, it will probably be much lower. Check the price in 6 months and see if the investment bankers did a good job of pricing it at $40

bonoz
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:55 am

Post by bonoz » Thu May 19, 2011 1:26 pm

So let me get this straight.

1) General public wouldn't have been able to buy it at $45 a pop? Only around $85 because that's what it was when the market opened?

2) And once they would have bought the shares, they couldn't have sold them when the price hit $120? They need to hold on to the shares for 30 days before they can sell it back on the market again?

Help a noob understand. Thanks.

xerty24
Posts: 4827
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Post by xerty24 » Thu May 19, 2011 1:28 pm

bonoz wrote:1) General public wouldn't have been able to buy it at $45 a pop? Only around $85 because that's what it was when the market opened?
Right, only a ~20% return instead of >100%.
2) And once they would have bought the shares, they couldn't have sold them when the price hit $120? They need to hold on to the shares for 30 days before they can sell it back on the market again?
You can sell whenever you want, unless you're an employee or something with a special restriction. Shorting is different.

Bruin
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:43 pm

Post by Bruin » Thu May 19, 2011 1:35 pm

rrosenkoetter wrote:
Bruin wrote:It's only at 106 now, spiked at 122.70. Here's what I don't get. Doesn't this just mean the investment bank that IPO'd the stock did a piss poor job?

I mean if I was the Linkedin CEO, and the company sold 7.84 million shares at $45 each, but the market priced them at $106 each, didn't the company just get screwed out of $478,000,000? That $478,000,000 went to the preferred customers of the investment bank that took Linkedin public. I know the CEO is probably happy personally, since his paper value in the company is now worth >$200 million.
Yeah, but it's not really worth that much.. By the time those people who got in before the IPO can actually sell their shares, it will probably be much lower. Check the price in 6 months and see if the investment bankers did a good job of pricing it at $40
Well, yes and no. It's very possible the price of the stock could drop over the next 6 months - which is relevant to the value of the CEO's stock (since he probably can't cash it in 6 months).

But that's not relevant to the cash inflow that Linkedin received - if Linkedin only received $45 per share today (yesterday), but the market priced their stock at $106 today, if you were Linkedin's board wouldn't you be upset? What happens with the stock price 6 months from now is not relevant to what Linkedin could have gotten today.

bonoz
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:55 am

Post by bonoz » Thu May 19, 2011 1:46 pm

xerty24 wrote:
bonoz wrote:1) General public wouldn't have been able to buy it at $45 a pop? Only around $85 because that's what it was when the market opened?
Right, only a ~20% return instead of >100%.
2) And once they would have bought the shares, they couldn't have sold them when the price hit $120? They need to hold on to the shares for 30 days before they can sell it back on the market again?
You can sell whenever you want, unless you're an employee or something with a special restriction. Shorting is different.
But had I bought the shares as part of the IPO process.. I'd be locked in?

User avatar
fredflinstone
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:35 am
Location: Bedrock

Post by fredflinstone » Thu May 19, 2011 1:48 pm

why do I need LinkedIn when all the people I want to talk to are right here on the Bogleheads Investment Forum?

xerty24
Posts: 4827
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Post by xerty24 » Thu May 19, 2011 1:48 pm

bonoz wrote:But had I bought the shares as part of the IPO process.. I'd be locked in?
xerty24 wrote:You can sell whenever you want, unless you're an employee or something with a special restriction.

AZK
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:49 am

Post by AZK » Thu May 19, 2011 1:56 pm

So why don't people routinely buyin to IPOs at the opening bell and then just sell at some point during the day? Quick way to get 20% in a day?

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 1:58 pm

Bruin wrote:
rrosenkoetter wrote:
Bruin wrote:It's only at 106 now, spiked at 122.70. Here's what I don't get. Doesn't this just mean the investment bank that IPO'd the stock did a piss poor job?

I mean if I was the Linkedin CEO, and the company sold 7.84 million shares at $45 each, but the market priced them at $106 each, didn't the company just get screwed out of $478,000,000? That $478,000,000 went to the preferred customers of the investment bank that took Linkedin public. I know the CEO is probably happy personally, since his paper value in the company is now worth >$200 million.
Yeah, but it's not really worth that much.. By the time those people who got in before the IPO can actually sell their shares, it will probably be much lower. Check the price in 6 months and see if the investment bankers did a good job of pricing it at $40
Well, yes and no. It's very possible the price of the stock could drop over the next 6 months - which is relevant to the value of the CEO's stock (since he probably can't cash it in 6 months).

But that's not relevant to the cash inflow that Linkedin received - if Linkedin only received $45 per share today (yesterday), but the market priced their stock at $106 today, if you were Linkedin's board wouldn't you be upset? What happens with the stock price 6 months from now is not relevant to what Linkedin could have gotten today.
Good point

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 1:58 pm

AZK wrote:So why don't people routinely buyin to IPOs at the opening bell and then just sell at some point during the day? Quick way to get 20% in a day?
Because they don't always go up...

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 2:01 pm

bonoz wrote:
xerty24 wrote:
bonoz wrote:1) General public wouldn't have been able to buy it at $45 a pop? Only around $85 because that's what it was when the market opened?
Right, only a ~20% return instead of >100%.
2) And once they would have bought the shares, they couldn't have sold them when the price hit $120? They need to hold on to the shares for 30 days before they can sell it back on the market again?
You can sell whenever you want, unless you're an employee or something with a special restriction. Shorting is different.
But had I bought the shares as part of the IPO process.. I'd be locked in?
Some of the people who got shares at the low IPO price can sell right aways. Others have to wait 6 months... Institutional buyers (like mutual funds) may have gotten in at the low price. Employees also (they are the ones that for sure have to wait to sell).

As a member of the general public, you usually lose money investing in an IPO the first day. But not always! Roll the dice!
Last edited by HomerJ on Thu May 19, 2011 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bonoz
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:55 am

Post by bonoz » Thu May 19, 2011 2:05 pm

rrosenkoetter wrote:
bonoz wrote:
xerty24 wrote:
bonoz wrote:1) General public wouldn't have been able to buy it at $45 a pop? Only around $85 because that's what it was when the market opened?
Right, only a ~20% return instead of >100%.
2) And once they would have bought the shares, they couldn't have sold them when the price hit $120? They need to hold on to the shares for 30 days before they can sell it back on the market again?
You can sell whenever you want, unless you're an employee or something with a special restriction. Shorting is different.
But had I bought the shares as part of the IPO process.. I'd be locked in?
Some of the people who got shares at the low IPO price can sell right aways. Others have to wait 6 months... Institutional buyers (like mutual funds) may have gotten in at the low price. Employees also (they are the ones that for sure have to wait to sell).

As a member of the general public, you usually lose money investing in an IPO the first day. But not always! Roll the dice!
How do we know who gets to sell them right away and who has to keep them for 6 months? How can one be a part of the either group?

Snowjob
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:53 pm

Post by Snowjob » Thu May 19, 2011 2:05 pm

xerty24 wrote:
Snowjob wrote:Tried to short this mulitple times around 105 and 110 today but I keep getting error messages from IB "no contracts available to short"
You should know that IPOs are unshortable for 30 days. Blame the SEC, not IB - they want to encourage the bubbles in new stocks apparently by making it illegal to have the opposite opinion.
Well that would explain it. I thought they couldnt find someone willing to lend me shares !

User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 11191
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ » Thu May 19, 2011 2:07 pm

bonoz wrote:How do we know who gets to sell them right away and who has to keep them for 6 months? How can one be a part of the either group?
I'm not 100% sure, but you will never be an insider for an IPO.. so it doesn't really matter.

matt
Posts: 2305
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:47 pm

Post by matt » Thu May 19, 2011 2:24 pm

Bruin wrote:But that's not relevant to the cash inflow that Linkedin received - if Linkedin only received $45 per share today (yesterday), but the market priced their stock at $106 today, if you were Linkedin's board wouldn't you be upset? What happens with the stock price 6 months from now is not relevant to what Linkedin could have gotten today.
That's why they only sell a small portion of shares with the IPO. It looks like only 8% of the company's shares were sold, so the 92% remaining are currently valued at $100 or so. They'll sell more of those over time.

matt
Posts: 2305
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:47 pm

Post by matt » Thu May 19, 2011 2:27 pm

bonoz wrote:How do we know who gets to sell them right away and who has to keep them for 6 months? How can one be a part of the either group?
If you are an insider of a company that is going public, I'm pretty sure you'll know that you are an insider of a company that is going public. If you are not an insider, you can buy and sell whenever you want.

larryswedroe
Posts: 15625
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 8:28 am
Location: St Louis MO

my thoughts on the LInked in IPO

Post by larryswedroe » Thu May 19, 2011 2:47 pm

can find them here
http://moneywatch.bnet.com/investing/bl ... -bet/2418/

Hope find it helpful

GammaPoint
Posts: 2559
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: California

Post by GammaPoint » Thu May 19, 2011 3:28 pm

Company doesn't nearly seem worth that to me, but then again, I don't care about or use LinkedIn.

xerty24
Posts: 4827
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Post by xerty24 » Thu May 19, 2011 3:40 pm

matt wrote:
Bruin wrote:But that's not relevant to the cash inflow that Linkedin received - if Linkedin only received $45 per share today (yesterday), but the market priced their stock at $106 today, if you were Linkedin's board wouldn't you be upset? What happens with the stock price 6 months from now is not relevant to what Linkedin could have gotten today.
That's why they only sell a small portion of shares with the IPO. It looks like only 8% of the company's shares were sold, so the 92% remaining are currently valued at $100 or so. They'll sell more of those over time.
Exactly, think of it as a very slow pump & dump. They sell 1/10 of the shares now and a price well below demand, resulting in lots of hype and free publicity and greedy/optimistic sentiment about their company. Then, over the next year or two they'll try to unload many of the remaining shares at the artificially high price. Scarcity, artificial or otherwise, can certainly engender a lot of irrational demand.

Bruin
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:43 pm

Post by Bruin » Fri May 20, 2011 1:44 pm

xerty24 wrote:
matt wrote:
Bruin wrote:But that's not relevant to the cash inflow that Linkedin received - if Linkedin only received $45 per share today (yesterday), but the market priced their stock at $106 today, if you were Linkedin's board wouldn't you be upset? What happens with the stock price 6 months from now is not relevant to what Linkedin could have gotten today.
That's why they only sell a small portion of shares with the IPO. It looks like only 8% of the company's shares were sold, so the 92% remaining are currently valued at $100 or so. They'll sell more of those over time.
Exactly, think of it as a very slow pump & dump. They sell 1/10 of the shares now and a price well below demand, resulting in lots of hype and free publicity and greedy/optimistic sentiment about their company. Then, over the next year or two they'll try to unload many of the remaining shares at the artificially high price. Scarcity, artificial or otherwise, can certainly engender a lot of irrational demand.
Thanks, yours and Matt's explanation makes sense.

So the IPO is just one big marketing event where the company paid marketing fees equal to Market Price of the Shares ($90) less the IPO Price ($45) times the number of shares sold that day (7.84 million). Then they get to cash in by hoping the price of the shares stay close to $90 and they slowly sell A LOT more shares over time.

User avatar
Random Musings
Posts: 5209
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Post by Random Musings » Fri May 20, 2011 2:56 pm

From my perspective, I know a lot of people who are "signed up" in LinkedIn - but I don't know who active the average signed up person is.

Currently, the format is a bit clunky to me.

RM

User avatar
floydtime
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:09 pm
Location: A book

Post by floydtime » Fri May 20, 2011 3:09 pm

Is linkedin now a publicly traded US company? If so, then I own some, as do most of the people on this forum. 8-)
"Do not value money for any more nor any less than its worth; it is a good servant but a bad master" - Alexandre Dumas

User avatar
aja8888
Posts: 484
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:28 pm
Location: The Woodlands, Texas

Post by aja8888 » Fri May 20, 2011 3:15 pm

I have had a Linkedin account for a year or so.. it's pretty much worthless, unless you are looking for a job. The thing I don't like is the site keeps sending me e-mails telling me that people I know are linked to other people. So what? It's also trying to sell me a premium membership, which is of no use to me.

whistler
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 5:59 pm

Post by whistler » Fri May 20, 2011 4:40 pm

xerty24 wrote:
Snowjob wrote:Tried to short this mulitple times around 105 and 110 today but I keep getting error messages from IB "no contracts available to short"
You should know that IPOs are unshortable for 30 days. Blame the SEC, not IB - they want to encourage the bubbles in new stocks apparently by making it illegal to have the opposite opinion.
can still buy put options, earlier than the 30 days, if your goal is to short sooner than the 30 days SEC limit as those options are on the market sooner...regardless very very risky...the stock can remain irrational much longer than you can remain solvent...learned my lesson early in my stock trading days...tried to short housing stocks during the recent bubble and although overvalued they went higher after my short...luckily the two i shorted came back down to only slightly more than i paid at which point i said goodbye to the stomach flips, but i learned my lesson and luckily it cost me not to much and it was early on so no real damage...boglehead way of investment really is the way to go for the nerves and stomach

Bruin
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:43 pm

Post by Bruin » Fri May 20, 2011 4:45 pm

floydtime wrote:Is linkedin now a publicly traded US company? If so, then I own some, as do most of the people on this forum. 8-)
Question is, did we buy in at $45 or at $90? :D

User avatar
floydtime
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:09 pm
Location: A book

Post by floydtime » Fri May 20, 2011 4:53 pm

Bruin wrote:
floydtime wrote:Is linkedin now a publicly traded US company? If so, then I own some, as do most of the people on this forum. 8-)
Question is, did we buy in at $45 or at $90? :D
Ahh, true. We'll probably never know!
"Do not value money for any more nor any less than its worth; it is a good servant but a bad master" - Alexandre Dumas

xerty24
Posts: 4827
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Post by xerty24 » Fri May 20, 2011 5:56 pm

floydtime wrote:
Bruin wrote:
floydtime wrote:Is linkedin now a publicly traded US company? If so, then I own some, as do most of the people on this forum. 8-)
Question is, did we buy in at $45 or at $90? :D
Ahh, true. We'll probably never know!
No, none of you own any yet, unless you bought the shares for your own account. The indexes don't add new IPOs right away, that only happens once or twice a year.

User avatar
floydtime
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:09 pm
Location: A book

Post by floydtime » Fri May 20, 2011 9:39 pm

xerty24 wrote:No, none of you own any yet, unless you bought the shares for your own account. The indexes don't add new IPOs right away, that only happens once or twice a year.
Good point. So we'll probably end up buying it for $19.95. :wink:
"Do not value money for any more nor any less than its worth; it is a good servant but a bad master" - Alexandre Dumas

sschullo
Posts: 2363
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:25 am
Location: Rancho Mirage, CA
Contact:

Post by sschullo » Sat May 21, 2011 8:23 am

Snowjob wrote:Tried to short this mulitple times around 105 and 110 today but I keep getting error messages from IB "no contracts available to short"
How dare you compete with GS! :)
Public School K-12 Educators: "Ask NOT what your annuity sales person can do for you, ask what you can do to be a Do-It-Yourselfer (DIY)."

Post Reply