"facebook's" epic fail? if anyone failed here, it's the banks who priced it a tad too high to match the marketing they did, and, more so, the financial punditry that hyped the crap out of it. facebook itself can hardly be blamed for setting the price so as to maximize the money it raised for the company and for the owners.
facebook's "epic" fail? if they overpriced it, it wasn't by much. certainly $10/share, the basic standard ipo launch price, was way too low. maybe they should have priced it at, what, $34 instead of $38? that's hardly epic proportions.
facebook's epic "fail"? they successfully raised probably as much money as the possibly could have. had they priced it 10% or 30% lower, they would have raised -- uh -- 10% or 30% less for the company and for the owners. so the it's rather difficult to call raising as much as they could have -- which is, after all, the entire point of an ipo -- a "fail".
bottom line is that this article is exactly the sort of self-important, narcissistic indulgence on the part of the financial media that the article itself is bemoaning.
oh, and i just love that "underwriters of the IPO undoubtedly spent millions of dollars, maybe hundreds of millions, propping up the stock Friday so it wouldn’t fall below the $38 offering price, as that would have been a huge embarrassment".
"undoubtedly"? wow, amazing financial reporting. next time, try "i'm guessing, based mostly on what other financial reporters are guessing".
for the record, i think facebook has long been way over-hyped, and i think the long-term potential for the business will sour once the next shiny internet thing comes along and facebook starts losing eyeballs the way myspace did. but the ipo itsef was undoubtedly a staggering success.
indeed, the problem is that its success exceeds what was warranted.
that's the opposite of fail.
= new reply since forum marked as read