After the recent WeWork IPO debacle, not to mention the Uber and Lyft public offering fiascos, investors may finally be waking up to the realization that they dumped a whole lot of money in pursuit of gains that will never materialize, and their "investments" are set for a painful lesson in irrational exuberance, even as silicon valley VC exits laugh all the way to the bank.
It is therefore no surprise that, as Goldman's chief equity strategist David Kostin writes in his latest "Weekly Kickstart" periodical, the abundance of new high-profile IPOs has prompted many questions from portfolio managers. One frequent inquiry: How does the 2019 class of IPOs compare with offerings completed during the late 1990s Tech boom?
To answer this question Kostin reviewed six variables and compare the 2019 class of IPOs with the those from the Tech boom: (1) volume, (2) sales growth, (3) path to profitability, (4) valuation, (5) sector, and (6) firm age. Here are the key findings:
VOLUME: “Mania” rather than “boom” is a better description of the IPO market in the late 1990s.An average of 400 IPOs were completed every year for 6 years. In contrast, the annual volume of IPOs has averaged 120 during the past 20 years and 2019 is matching that pace with 75 IPOs completed YTD (107 annualized). Yet if investors merely allocate far more capital to fewer potential blow ups, is that really a consolation?
more of course,,,,,,
http://www.zerohedge.com/markets/top-30-ipos-2019-will-burn-total-125-billion-between-them?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29
Realist - Everybody in America is soft, and hates conflict. The cure for this, both in politics and social life, is the same -- hardihood. Give them raw truth.
| 
