Live data from Hacker News

A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

dx.doi.org

11–20 of 119 posts

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#11
I'm reading this to imply that as a general rule of thumb, in recent times SPACs have been a better deal for the company going public than for the SPAC investors. That outsized returns exist but are not the norm.

There was a good resource linked in one of the footnotes that is a much more concise summary: "SPAC Attack: everything a founder or investor should know" https://luttig.substack.com/p/spac-attack-everything-a-found...

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#12
post #3

Just one example of why SPACs need to be looked at from a regulatory perspective: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/chamath-palihapitiya-backed-... In short, Clover Health is going public via a SPAC, but never disclosed it was under investigation by the DOJ. > Clover said it decided it did not need to disclose the DOJ inquiries after consultation with its lawyers. The company did not say what the DOJ’s inquiries were a…

He also fanned the flames of outrage at Robinhood over PFOF, while SPACing a competitor who does the same things he critisizes Robinhood for.[1]

Probably not illegal, but leaves a bad taste. I get the surface-level appeal of this guy's narrative (especially his CNBC appearences), but I don't get the idolatry towards him. He's not some sort of people's hero, he's just another rich guy who sometimes has cathartic rants about other rich people in order to get richer.

[1] https://twitter.com/tysonbrody/status/1355967493089669131

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#13
post #9
post #3

Just one example of why SPACs need to be looked at from a regulatory perspective: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/chamath-palihapitiya-backed-... In short, Clover Health is going public via a SPAC, but never disclosed it was under investigation by the DOJ. > Clover said it decided it did not need to disclose the DOJ inquiries after consultation with its lawyers. The company did not say what the DOJ’s inquiries were a…

Not long ago short sellers were claiming Tesla was in trouble with the DoJ over the Model 3. Ended up a big nothing; we don't know if there is any meat here. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/11/02/tesla-says-doj-and-sec-a...

Yes, very possible there is zero meat to the actual investigation. And very possible it's just the short seller pushing a narrative to drive the price down. But how do we know the truth when there are no disclosures?

As an investor, you should have a right to be informed of investment risks.

An active/ongoing DOJ investigation (even if routine) seems like something investors would need to be aware of to make an informed investment decision.

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#14
I didn't know a great deal about SPACs, but it looks like the real winners are the initial Sponsors and IPO investors, while the losers are the suckers who pay shares after the SPAC merges with the target company.

Let's examine how convoluted the SPAC process is. First, a SPAC raises money through an IPO that it will use to merge with a target company. Then, when the SPAC finds a target and proposes a merger, many of the initial IPO investors redeem their investment at a handsome guaranteed return....so then the SPAC has to go out and raise more money through private placements?!?

What?! Isn't the whole point of the SPAC to raise funds to complete the merger?

As a rule of thumb, the more convoluted things get in finance, the more nefarious the intentions

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#15
post #10
post #3

Just one example of why SPACs need to be looked at from a regulatory perspective: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/chamath-palihapitiya-backed-... In short, Clover Health is going public via a SPAC, but never disclosed it was under investigation by the DOJ. > Clover said it decided it did not need to disclose the DOJ inquiries after consultation with its lawyers. The company did not say what the DOJ’s inquiries were a…

Chamath first came to my attention last week when he introduced his run for California governor by promising to give everyone free money and cut taxes to zero. He then bought into GameStop stock, pumped it, and sold at the top while many gullible fools lost their life savings. What a shady dude.

Chamath sold GME the day after the purchase and donated the proceeds. The purchase was announced on Twitter after soliciting a community investment idea. The sale was announced the following day on CNBC. Shady it was not, and I don't know how much more transparency you could want here.

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#16
post #12
post #3

Just one example of why SPACs need to be looked at from a regulatory perspective: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/chamath-palihapitiya-backed-... In short, Clover Health is going public via a SPAC, but never disclosed it was under investigation by the DOJ. > Clover said it decided it did not need to disclose the DOJ inquiries after consultation with its lawyers. The company did not say what the DOJ’s inquiries were a…

He also fanned the flames of outrage at Robinhood over PFOF, while SPACing a competitor who does the same things he critisizes Robinhood for.[1] Probably not illegal, but leaves a bad taste. I get the surface-level appeal of this guy's narrative (especially his CNBC appearences), but I don't get the idolatry towards him. He's not some sort of people's hero, he's just another rich guy who sometimes has cathartic rants…

From my observations I think he has the gift of being utterly convincing in the way he speaks while also having a good track record. But only after listening a lot to him I started noticing, that the points he conveys of being the definitive true answer to something start contradicting other things he said earlier.

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#17
post #12
post #3

Just one example of why SPACs need to be looked at from a regulatory perspective: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/chamath-palihapitiya-backed-... In short, Clover Health is going public via a SPAC, but never disclosed it was under investigation by the DOJ. > Clover said it decided it did not need to disclose the DOJ inquiries after consultation with its lawyers. The company did not say what the DOJ’s inquiries were a…

He also fanned the flames of outrage at Robinhood over PFOF, while SPACing a competitor who does the same things he critisizes Robinhood for.[1] Probably not illegal, but leaves a bad taste. I get the surface-level appeal of this guy's narrative (especially his CNBC appearences), but I don't get the idolatry towards him. He's not some sort of people's hero, he's just another rich guy who sometimes has cathartic rants…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHZl59B6Rc8

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#18
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also fanned the flames of outrage at Robinhood over PFOF, while SPACing a competitor who does the same things he critisizes Robinhood for.[1] Probably not illegal, but leaves a bad taste. I get the surface-level appeal of this guy's narrative (especially his CNBC appearences), but I don't get the idolatry towards him. He's not some sort of people's hero, he's just another rich guy who sometimes has cathartic rants…

From my observations I think he has the gift of being utterly convincing in the way he speaks while also having a good track record. But only after listening a lot to him I started noticing, that the points he conveys of being the definitive true answer to something start contradicting other things he said earlier.

His track record is for making money, which isn't obviously good for anyone else

Re: A Sober Look at SPACs (2020)

#19
post #6

I know its high risk... but some of those space oriented SPACs are just so tantalizing, anything to get closer to investing in SpaceX...

Space industry will a money black hole for a while longer IMO. I suppose it didn't really matter to every other disruptive startup so maybe stocks only go up /s
Post reply on HN