Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers • Hacker News Board

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#51

Post by nerfhammer » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 10:54 PM UTC

danjayh wrote: post #23

I think that this is just the beginning. In my opinion, we're heading for a tech bust that's going to spread to the rest of the economy, and deflate additional bubbles (housing, for one). The government has been pushing cheap money for the better part of a decade in the name of creating the appearance of a 'recovery', but what they've really done is build a new house of cards. Make no mistake: the 'free' money that's…

> because in many areas the median house now costs enough that it's beyond the reach of the median person. That environment is unsustainable over a large time scale.

"Too expensive" does not equal bubble. It has to be expensive because speculators are driving the price up, thinking they're all fooling each other. As soon as they get get scared that the other speculators might be thinking of selling the price suddenly collapses as they race to not be the last to divest.

If something is expensive because it's scarce, is actually being practically used, and there are no substitutes, then there is no way to make the price suddenly collapse other than flooding the market with new supply, and it would take many years to increase the supply of housing by a significant percent. If the price of housing drops a bit all of the homeowners aren't going to rush to sell their homes in a panic like you might see with a purely speculative asset.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#52

Post by junto » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 10:57 PM UTC

sawthat wrote: post #39

danjayh wrote: post #23

I think that this is just the beginning. In my opinion, we're heading for a tech bust that's going to spread to the rest of the economy, and deflate additional bubbles (housing, for one). The government has been pushing cheap money for the better part of a decade in the name of creating the appearance of a 'recovery', but what they've really done is build a new house of cards. Make no mistake: the 'free' money that's…

I predict, that in the future, there will be a recession. Also, at some point, an economic boom. Feel free to quote me on that. I am unable to give exact dates, but there is a 25% chance that it will begin in the spring (what year, I cannot say)

I'll go even further and day that it will go up and down again continuously. An "economic cycle" if you will.

You can quote me on that too! :-)

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#53

Post by danjayh » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 10:57 PM UTC

Domenic_S wrote: post #46

danjayh wrote: post #23

I think that this is just the beginning. In my opinion, we're heading for a tech bust that's going to spread to the rest of the economy, and deflate additional bubbles (housing, for one). The government has been pushing cheap money for the better part of a decade in the name of creating the appearance of a 'recovery', but what they've really done is build a new house of cards. Make no mistake: the 'free' money that's…

> in many areas the median house now costs enough that it's beyond the reach of the median person I don't see it. Maybe bubbly areas like SJ will correct a bit, but at the end of the day real estate is a supply/demand calculation. YoY% increases don't look like they did in the last bubble. The more people who want to live somewhere -- whether renters or buyers -- the higher the prices go, until sales start dropping o…

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/11/daily-c...

EDIT: I am specifically referring to the "Price to Income" chart in my comment below, not the one that shows up by default. Sorry for the confusion.

--

Uncheck everything but the 'US' graph. Different data sources give different ratios, but they all show that it's still well above historical norms & headed up. Some data sources say that it's already approximately back to where it was in the peak (see a link further down, that chart is up-to-date), others like this one only show it ~1/2 way there (note tat this chart is two years out of date), but either way we're above what has been stable in the past.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#54

Post by GeoffreySteven » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:01 PM UTC

I have done a dozen or so private share sales or purchases.

The model I have really come to like is EquityZen's. (https://www.equityzen.com)

Using a crowd sourced approach, a group of accredited investors (buyers) can participate in purchasing a block of shares as a fund. A win for the smaller individual investor who could not normally participate due to various constraints (ie buying power, transaction costs).

Likewise, its also a win for sellers and it applies to the Unicorn's of the world. It gives these shareholders access to a market they wouldn't normally access.

It seems that selling shares privately is becoming more common, any model that connects a larger group of accredited buyers to accredited sellers is good - IMHO.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#55

Post by jonesb6 » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:02 PM UTC

I predict in the future more people will declare bubbles until there is an actual bubble. Then, even after the bubble is fully deflated, those people will tell everybody about how they predicted this bubble ahead of everybody else. Then time will pass. People will then continue declaring bubbles, until one day they too they can become a true oracle of the bubble world. Then time will pass..

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#56

Post by jessedhillon » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:03 PM UTC

dkarapetyan wrote: post #49

jessedhillon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are confusing business and technology fundamentals. Business fundamentals -- bottom-line numbers on the P&L statement -- are not furthered by increasing the number of active users alone, or by delighting users. Only ad revenue would increase the fundamentals being discussed here.

I disagree with the overall sentiment. Doing the right thing technology-wise and delighting users is what made google possible. Technology fundamentals != business fundamentals but the pre-not-bubble-but-maybe-bubble market did not have either one. Many companies were pure buzz with neither business nor technology figured out.

Then you're basically arguing semantics while agreeing with the sentiment in question here. You're saying that startups do best when they focus on delivering value to users first, and then figuring out a path to profit that preserves the first value. Which is a strategy that investors who make big bets on potential would also promote.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#57

Post by hyperliner » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:04 PM UTC

ZoF wrote: post #19

jluxenberg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Side note: You're considered an "accredited investor" if you made $200k/year in each of the prior two years and expect a similar income in the current year. https://www.investor.gov/news-alerts/investor-bulletins/inve... So, not necessarily just "wealthy" individuals.

Heh, I'm not 'poor' but how in the hell is 199k/year not 'wealthy'?

http://www.newblackmaninexile.net/2011/10/they-aint-wealthy-...

"Shaq is rich; the white man that signs his check is wealthy. Here you go Shaq, go buy yourself a bouncing car. Bling-Bling . . . . I ain’t talking bout Oprah, I’m talking about Bill Gates. OK!. If Bill Gates woke up tomorrow with Oprah’s money, he would jump out a …window. I’m not talking about rich, I’m talking about wealthy

- Chris Rock"

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#58

Post by ojbyrne » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:05 PM UTC

jluxenberg wrote: post #14

mmanfrin wrote: post #2

Semi related question: One has to be an accredited (i.e. wealthy) investor to invest in startups, but this does not apply to employees exercising options. Does that mean that employees who do not meet the wealth requirements to be accredited are only ever able to sell ownership, and only to accredited investors?

Side note: You're considered an "accredited investor" if you made $200k/year in each of the prior two years and expect a similar income in the current year. https://www.investor.gov/news-alerts/investor-bulletins/inve... So, not necessarily just "wealthy" individuals.

Additional side note: if you're married, it's a total of $300k/year for the household.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#59

Post by CydeWeys » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:07 PM UTC

mmanfrin wrote: post #30

st3v3r wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You live in downtown Manhattan.

$200k in Manhattan puts you above 84% of people living in Manhattan. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/mar/...

Sure, but "wealthy" doesn't just mean the top quintile. "Wealthy" is a more exclusive club than that. When I think "wealthy", I'm thinking top 1%.

But this is one of those words that should probably be set aside for the purposes of debate in favor of something more specific, because arguing over the definition of a term that doesn't actually have a standard definition isn't terribly productive.

Re: Secondary shops flooded with unicorn sellers

#60

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 19, 2016, 11:18 PM UTC

danjayh wrote: post #23

I think that this is just the beginning. In my opinion, we're heading for a tech bust that's going to spread to the rest of the economy, and deflate additional bubbles (housing, for one). The government has been pushing cheap money for the better part of a decade in the name of creating the appearance of a 'recovery', but what they've really done is build a new house of cards. Make no mistake: the 'free' money that's…

[deleted]