Posts Tagged ‘IPO’

Facebook IPO to Be Listed on Nasdaq

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012

Facebook is friending Nasdaq in one of the most-desirable deals among the Internet companies jockeying ahead in the race for social-media IPOs.  The addition of Facebook’s listing enhances Nasdaq’s reputation as the favored exchange among high-tech companies.  The exchange is home to several tech firms, including Apple and Google.  The stock will trade under the symbol FB, as Facebook prepares its initial public offering for May.

“This is a strong, substantial win for Nasdaq, and no doubt a momentum builder for future listings,” said Richard Repetto, an analyst at Sandler O’Neill & Partners.  Facebook’s IPO — which could raise as much as $10 billion — -is likely to be the biggest Internet IPO since Google’s in 2004.  “Winning Google further emboldened Nasdaq’s reputation as being the exchange of choice for the technology companies,” said Jay Frankl, senior managing director at FTI Consulting.  “The Facebook listing I’ve seen as being similar to the Google listing, which had a similar competition between the exchanges, and a similar win for Nasdaq.”

Companies pay an annual fee to list their stock, while exchanges receive listings-related income from the sale of market data and additional services offered to their listed companies.  A company can pay as much as $500,000 annually to be listed on the NYSE, while all Nasdaq fees are capped at approximately $100,000.

The decision is a big victory for Nasdaq, which competes intensely with NYSE Euronext, which operates the New York Stock Exchange.  The listing will give Facebook financial clout as it works to expand its global audience of about 845 million users.  It also might help Facebook avoid a challenge from Google, which wants to rival Facebook with its own social networking system.

Writing in Forbes, Robert Hof wonders if “Will Facebook’s sudden, outsized presence distort the Nasdaq index of 100 companies so that it becomes even more volatile than it already is?  It’s not a premature question by any means.  Already, just a few companies – Apple, Google, Microsoft, Intel, and Oracle – dominate the Nasdaq index, accounting for nearly half the value of the entire Nasdaq 100.  Thanks to its incredible run, Apple stock once again accounts for almost 20 percent of the index, after exchange operator Nasdaq OMX Group reduced its weighting to 12 percent a year ago.  It’s not clear yet, of course, what kind of presence Facebook will have in the index, since it obviously has to go public first and then get added by Nasdaq OMX.  But it seems a good bet that trading in its shares, like those of many new issues, will be anything but calm.  And given the huge interest in the company by investors and the press, and the relatively small float at the outset, every little announcement or hiccup seems sure to send the shares soaring or plummeting.  If Facebook becomes a significant portion of the Nasdaq index, as seems likely, that could make the famously dynamic index even more volatile.  This isn’t much of a problem for Facebook itself.  Its fate rests less with what the stock does in the short term than with how CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his business executives Sheryl Sandberg and others build out the company’s advertising, payments, and other potential businesses.”

CNBC’s Bob Pisani says that Nasdaq’s securing the Facebook listing is an important psychological victory. According to Pisani, “What does matter are the co-branding opportunities, and it here it gets down to a simple issue: what are you offering in the way of a partnership?  It’s not hard to imagine the pitch: the NYSE would certainly have argued that they have broader business-to-business connections with the biggest companies in the world, with whom they can partner to expand the brand name and co-venture with.  I have mentioned before that, as an example, if Groupon (which listed on Nasdaq) was doing something with Starbucks, Groupon might send out 65 million emails that references a deal with Starbucks and Groupon, with the solicitation noting that Groupon is listed on Nasdaq.  Nasdaq will pick up a portion of that cost.  Zillow, to take another company (also on Nasdaq), might have been very interested that Nasdaq has an enormous electronic sign in Times Square that is a virtual billboard for a company that wants to attract eyeballs to its website.  Get it?  What can you offer us?  And just what did Nasdaq offer to Facebook?”

A New Chapter for Iconic Empire State Building

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

The landmark 102-story Empire State Building in midtown Manhattan could raise as much as $1 billion in a share sale and become a real estate investment trust (REIT), if the company that controls that iconic structure if its plans pan out.  According to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing, Empire State Realty Trust, Inc., intends to list the shares on the New York Stock Exchange.  The firm, Malkin Holdings, LLC, will consolidate a group of closely held companies to form the REIT as part of the IPO, according to a separate filing.

Malkin, supervisor of the company the holds the title to the tower, said that it had “embarked on a course of action” that could result in the Empire State Building becoming part of a new REIT.  Malkin Holdings supervises property-owning partnerships led by Peter and Anthony Malkin, and owns the 2.9 million-square-foot Empire State Building in conjunction with the estate of Leona Helmsley.  Bank of America, Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. will advise on the IPO.  The price and number of shares were not disclosed in the filing.

The proposed IPO would give investors a rare opportunity to own a piece of one of the world’s most famous buildings as New York’s real estate values rebound after the recession.  Midtown Manhattan office property prices have recovered 87 percent of their value since bottoming out in mid-2009, according to Green Street Advisors Inc., a REIT research firm.

The REIT would consolidate Manhattan and New York area properties owned by companies including Empire State Building Associates LLC, 60 East 42nd St. Associates LLC and 250 West 57th St. Associates LLC. Participants can opt to receive cash instead of shares for as much as 15 percent of the value.

Since gaining control of the building 10 years ago, Malkin has invested tens of millions of dollars to improve the office spaces and cut the cost of heating and maintaining the 81-year-old structure.  That helped attract tenants such as social networking site LinkedIn.  According to the SEC filing, Malkin said that upgrading the building still requires additional investment of between $55 million and $65 million over the next four years.

As with many recent tech and internet IPOs, the company plans to have two classes of stock — class A shares that are sold to the public and worth one vote, as well as class B shares with 50 votes each.  The structure leaves the Malkin family with significant control.  The proceeds will pay existing stakeholders in the buildings who chose to take cash in exchange for their interests, and to repay debt.  The REIT will list itself on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “ESB.”

The Malkins realize that leasing in New York is “highly competitive,” and faces new rivals in the skyline, primarily the One World Trade Center, which will have a broadcast antenna and observation deck that could attract tenants away from the Empire State Building.

At 1,250 feet and 102 floors, the art deco-style building is one of New York City’s most recognizable tourist destinations, enjoying its second stint as the city’s tallest building.  It was the world’s tallest building from its 1931 opening until 1974, when the 442-meter Sears Tower (now Willis Tower) was completed in Chicago.

The building played a starring role in several movies, most notably “King Kong,” “An Affair to Remember” and “Sleepless in Seattle.”

Is the Timing Right for a Facebook IPO?

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011

Facebook is contemplating the idea raising about $10 billion in an IPO that would value the predominant social-networking website at more than $100 billion.  At $10 billion, the offering would raise significantly more money than any other technology IPO, and Facebook expects investors to be eager to buy into the social-networking company.  The IPO would overshadow that of the previous record holder, Infineon Technologies AG, which generated $5.23 billion in its 1999 debut.  Agere Systems Inc., which raised $4.14 billion in 2000, currently occupies second place.

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s 27-year-old founder and CEO, will undoubtedly be rewarded by the website’s rise.  A valuation of $100 billion will further increase Zuckerberg’s net worth which had earlier been estimated at $17 billion, according to Forbes magazine.

Facebook expects federal regulators to call for the firm to disclose its financial results by April 30, 2012 — if it doesn’t go public sooner.  Facebook chose to wait until next year to launch its IPO to give CEO Mark Zuckerberg extra time to add users and increase sales.  Facebook, which has a staggering 800 million users, is also increasing its focus on mobile technology, aiming to leverage the shift to smart phones and tablets.  The firm expects its next billion users to connect primarily via mobile devices, rather than desktop computers.

Zuckerberg noted that an IPO isn’t something he has spent “a lot of time on a day-to-day basis thinking about.  We’ve made this implicit promise to our investors and to our employees that by compensating them with equity and by giving them equity, that at some point we’re going to make that equity worth something publicly and in a liquid way.  Now, the promise isn’t that we’re going to do it on any kind of short-term time horizon.  The promise is that we’re going to build this company so that it’s great over the long term.  And that we’re always making these decisions for the long term, but at some point we’ll do that.

Writing in the New York Times’ “Deal Book” column, Steven M. Davidoff isn’t certain that this is the correct time for a Facebook IPO.  “Facebook is in a corner.  Another Internet hotshot, Groupon, is trading below its offering price, and the market for internet initial public offerings over all appears to be deflating.  The European sovereign debt crisis isn’t helping the market gloom.  The coming months are shaping up to be a bad time to undertake an IPO.  Still, Facebook will almost certainly have to go public during this time whether it wants to or not — and whether or not it can get a valuation of $100 billion or more in doing so.  And it’s partly Facebook’s fault — it just has too many shareholders.  Securities regulation requires a United States company with 500 or more shareholders of record to begin filing reports, including audited financial information, with the Securities and Exchange Commission four months after the year it exceeds this threshold.  Facebook most likely exceeded 500 shareholders this year.  By the end of April 2012, it will become subject to this heightened regulation and have to disclose a spate of confidential business information.”

What does the prospect of an IPO mean to potential investors? TechCrunch writer Josh Constine wasn’t optimistic in a post bluntly titled “Why Greedy Stockholders and a $100 Billion IPO Could Hurt Facebook.” Constine says that if Facebook becomes subject to the desire of its stockholders, the site will innovate less by making profit a higher priority than user experience.  For example, more ads are likely to pop up on users’ pages.  “Outside stockholders could detract from Facebook’s vision and momentum,” he wrote.  “They could push for faster returns, and pressure the company to display more ads, turn mobile into a direct revenue stream, and play it safe with product.  This might produce short-term gains, but could hamper what CEO Mark Zuckerberg has built into a core communications utility for the world.”

AIG Repays Another $2 Billion in TARP Money

Thursday, September 8th, 2011

The Treasury Department is laughing all the way to the bank. Insurance Giant AIG repaid $2.15 billion that it had borrowed through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).  In 2008, the government helped the giant get back on its feet with a $180 billion loan.  AIG has been gradually repaying the money.  The most recent repayment is the result of the sale of AIG’s Taiwan-based subsidiary Nan Shan Life Insurance Company. One of AIG’s strategies for cutting its debt has been to raise funds by selling assets.  “We continue to make progress in helping the Treasury and taxpayers recoup their investment in AIG,” according to AIG CEO Robert Benmosche.

Not surprisingly, the Treasury Department is pleased with the transaction.  “This is another important milestone in AIG’s remarkable turnaround,” Tim Massad, the assistant secretary for financial stability, said in a statement. “We continue to make progress in recovering the taxpayers’ investments in AIG.”  AIG still owes Treasury $51 billion.  TARP legislation was passed by Congress in late 2008 to rescue the financial sector, which was on the verge of collapse.

Benmosche is still weighing whether to retain a stake in AIA Group Ltd. while repaying TARP funds. AIG sold 67 percent of Hong Kong-based AIA last year in an IPO that raised $20.5 billion. The remaining interest added $1.52 billion to AIG’s second-quarter profit as the Asian insurer’s stock price surged. AIA has soared 19 percent this year and is the number one gainer in the 73-company Bloomberg World Insurance Index. “It’s been a great investment, so they may want to hold onto it,” said Paul Newsome, an analyst at Sandler O’Neill & Partners LP.

Now that the Nan Shan deal has closed, AIG’s final significant disposal will be International Lease Finance Corporation, or ILFC, which purchases airplanes to lease them to airlines.  The company is considering an initial public offering (IPO) for ILFC later this year.  Using Nan Shan proceeds to repay the special purpose vehicle gives AIG “more flexibility as to what to do with ILFC and other assets, too.  It adds in general to their cash-flow flexibility.”  He is telling his clients to buy AIG stock.  Treasury holds a $9.3 billion preferred interest in the special-purpose vehicle after accepting proceeds from the Nan Shan sale, according to AIG.  Benmosche may delay or forego selling AIA shares.  AIG’s agreement with underwriters lets Benmosche reduce or hedged the stake in October.  “We’re looking potentially at monetizing other assets that we have so that AIA might be sold much later on, if at all,” he said.

Writing in The Hill, Peter Schroeder says that “In many ways, AIG came to serve as a symbol of much of the public’s anger over the bailout, as it found itself at the center of the historic financial crisis and reliant on substantial government support.  That dissatisfaction came to a head in 2009, when executives at the company planned to distribute hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses after billions in losses during the financial crisis.  In January, AIG completely repaid the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with a $47 billion payment, and the Treasury in May agreed to sell 200 million shares of AIG stock, raising nearly $9 billion in that offering.  The latest payback from AIG means the Treasury has recovered $313 billion of the investments it made under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) — roughly three-quarters of the $412 billion it originally dished out to keep the financial system afloat.  The Treasury announced in March that it had officially turned a profit on the bank portion of TARP.  It followed that up with a July announcement that it had exited its investment in Chrysler, ahead of schedule but losing about $1.3 billion in the process.”

On the Huffington Post, Jason Linkins has a cynical take on AIG’s recent repayment of TARP money. “Okay, I’m just going to stop it right there, because when it comes to ‘AIG’s remarkable turnaround,’ the devil is in the details.  Time and time again we’re asked to celebrate the success of TARP.  Back in March, the good news was that, ‘The Treasury currently estimates that bank programs within TARP will ultimately provide a lifetime profit of nearly $20 billion to taxpayers.’  But this profit that the government has turned on the bailout of AIG rings pretty hollow in light of the four different restructurings of the original agreement that the government has acquiesced to since the fall of 2008.

“When the Fed first stepped in to prevent AIG from collapse in September 2008, the deal was actually pretty good — it carried a punitively-high interest rate appropriate for a bailout, the CEO was dismissed and the company was going to sell itself off in parts, ending its too-big-to-fail status.  If the government were turning a profit on a deal like this, it would indeed be good news.  The trouble is, AIG’s new management didn’t break up the company very quickly.  And even as it paid out lavish bonuses to its top-performing traders and executives, it couldn’t make good on its interest payments to the government.  So the feds stepped in again — and again, and again — throwing more money at the company, reducing the interest that it would pay taxpayers and eventually converting the government’s loans to common stock, abandoning concrete repayment obligations in favor of whatever the stock might someday be worth.”

Potential Facebook IPO Could Value Company at $100 Billion

Monday, June 27th, 2011

Facebook is likely to file for an initial public offering (IPO) as early as October or November that could value the popular social networking site at more than a whopping $100 billion.   Goldman Sachs is the top candidate to manage the lucrative offering, which could come in the 1st quarter of 2012.  Facebook, whose chief operating officer last month called an IPO “inevitable,” made no comment on the report.

The company’s IPO likely would probably be prompted by a section of the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act known as “the 500 rule” At heart, the rule mandates that once a private company has more than 500 investors, it must release quarterly financial information to the Securities and Exchange Commission, just as public companies do.  Facebook, which is likely to cross the 500-investor threshold this year, would probably launch a formal IPO in advance of a public-company reporting obligation that would be required next April.  Another factor motivating the IPO, according to people familiar with the plans, is Facebook’s wish to increase employee compensation.  Early in 2010, Facebook curbed employees’ ability to sell their company shares privately to other investors — a move that may now be prompting employees to quit Facebook so they can monetize their shares.  If the company goes public, however, employees will be able to sell their stock on the open market, allowing them to cash in on their holdings.

“Unable to sell their private shares, Facebook employees are growing restless,” according to Kate Kelly at CNBC.   “An initial public offering is expected.  A factor in the company’s IPO timing is the Securities and Exchange Commission’s requirement that some companies like Facebook must disclose financial information if they have more than 500 private investors.”  The IPO speculation and record high valuation is comes on the heels of recent numbers showing declining user-ship in some of Facebook’s leading markets.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Shira Ovide says that “Facebook is on track to exceed $2 billion in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization for 2011.  That’s even higher than the expected 2011 profit circulated in the early part of the year when Goldman Sachs and Russian investment house Digital Sky Technologies invested in Facebook at a $50 billion valuation.  If Facebook ends the year with $2 billion in Ebitda, would IPO investors stomach a 50 times trailing multiple valuation?  Seems bubble-like.  Trust us.  Wall Street bankers, lawyers, P.R. mavens, caterers and everyone else are slobbering for a slice of the Facebook IPO magic.  Facebook has been meeting with potential bankers that want to shepherd the IPO.  Goldman Sachs is thought to have an inside track to lead the IPO thanks to its recent investment in Facebook, but don’t count out big banks such as J.P. Morgan and Morgan Stanley, which have led recent big tech IPOs.  Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been non-committal about an IPO for a long time.  As recently as December, Zuckerberg gave his weird deer-in-headlights stare when ’60 Minutes’ asked him whether he would ever push his baby into the public markets.  ‘Maybe’ was Zuckerberg’s answer.  But momentum is taking over.”

Not so fast, says Fortune magazine’s Dan Primack. According to Primack, “Pay attention to news that Facebook is planning its IPO.  But take its proposed valuation with a grain of salt.  First, the most recent private trades of Facebook stock came in at around $85 billion, and private trades are meant to be done at a discount to public valuations.  LinkedIn shares, for example, traded at $23 per share on the private markets six months before going public at $45 per share.  At that velocity, Facebook actually would be valued at $165 billion next January.  More importantly, it’s impossible to intelligently speculate on an Internet company valuation 6-10 months out.  Will the bubble still be inflating?  Will it have popped?  Will macro trends have continued their anemic recovery, or double-dipped back down?  Facebook is probably immune to the timing issues related to IPO windows, but it does not stand apart from the economy at large.  If we experience a massive advertising pullback, for example, then Facebook could take a hit in its largest revenue pot (or at least a growth slowdown).  Not saying that will happen, but obviously it could.  To me, the only value in today’s ‘$100 billion’ report is in referring back to it when the company has an actual public valuation.”

Back to the Futures? Not Just Yet. Investors Still Spooked by Derivatives

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

It’s no surprise that investors are still wary of investing in derivatives, given the financial devastation that these vehicles’ collapse caused last year.  Proof of the fact is that the IPO of a financial instrument designed to be on American home prices failed because its auction did not generate adequate investor interest.51916680SC005_NYSE

According to its Securities and Exchange Commission filing, MacroMarkets turned down all auction bids because there was an “insufficient demand for an equal number of Down and Up shares”.  In other words, MacroMarkets was forced to abandon the auction process because the offering would work only if there was an equal number of shares in both the “up” and the “down” trusts – and if each pair of shares totaled $50.  The firm had initially set a minimum closing investment pool of $125 million, though CEO Sam Masucci did not disclose the value of the bids received before pulling the plug.

MacroMarkets sought out investment from homebuilders and banks who want to hedge their housing exposure, as well as foreign investors seeking a stake in U.S. real estate.  The problem is that investors had difficulty valuing the shares because it meant predicting the movement of the 10-city index on which the offering was based.  That’s not easy in a housing market where prices may not have bottomed out yet.

When housing trusts eventually restart, their shares will trade under the symbols UMM for “up” and DMM for “down” on the NYSE Arca, the New York Stock Exchange’s all-electronic U.S. trading platform.