Live data from Hacker News

Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

techcrunch.com

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#21
No pop does not = bad IPO. Pandora raised more capital than intended as the final IPO price of $16/share was about double that of the initial target IPO price range of $7 to $9. The lack of stock price volatility in the market is often a good thing as it allows the company a clearer picture of its capital base.

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#22
post #13
post #11

Pandora is still massively overpriced at $16/share. I reckon a price at $2/share would still be a significant gamble: http://shortlogic.tumblr.com/post/6586713689/pandora-should-...

That post is skewed and narrow-minded. Pandora is in places most people don't realize, and has growth opportunities the poster is not taking into account. Remember, there's a big difference between a lifestyle business and a startup. A startup knows how to grow and do so creatively. A lifestyle business has no such inclination, and those involved with such efforts tend to think about other businesses in a narrow mann…

So to restate your argument, Pandora is a company capable of carrying out an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody knows what it is.

Does that sound fair?

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#23

No pop does not = bad IPO. Pandora raised more capital than intended as the final IPO price of $16/share was about double that of the initial target IPO price range of $7 to $9. The lack of stock price volatility in the market is often a good thing as it allows the company a clearer picture of its capital base.

Pandora didn't get any of that "pop" capital. It went to investors who were able to sell on the first day.

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#26
post #22
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That post is skewed and narrow-minded. Pandora is in places most people don't realize, and has growth opportunities the poster is not taking into account. Remember, there's a big difference between a lifestyle business and a startup. A startup knows how to grow and do so creatively. A lifestyle business has no such inclination, and those involved with such efforts tend to think about other businesses in a narrow mann…

So to restate your argument, Pandora is a company capable of carrying out an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody knows what it is. Does that sound fair?

It sounds distorted. Pandora is a huge brand name and is already in places you aren't aware of -- in part because you're probably not its target market.

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#27
post #15
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That post is skewed and narrow-minded. Pandora is in places most people don't realize, and has growth opportunities the poster is not taking into account. Remember, there's a big difference between a lifestyle business and a startup. A startup knows how to grow and do so creatively. A lifestyle business has no such inclination, and those involved with such efforts tend to think about other businesses in a narrow mann…

Hahaha. That's your argument? "They're in many places and you wouldn't understand why they're so valuable if you have a 'lifestyle' business". How about dishing concrete examples of all these places they're in that's going to make them as astonishingly profitable as they need to be to justify a $2.5B valuation?

Hahaha. That's your argument?

Yes, my snarky friend, that's my argument. Given your years of experience running startups from conception to IPO/buyout, I'm sure you can understand.

BTW I don't scoff at all at lifestyle businesses, if you're lucky enough to pull one off. But they're a different beast, and expertise in one area does not automatically translate to expertise in another.

Re: Pandora Pop Is Gone Day After IPO

#28
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about not assuming a company that just IPOed is at the end of its road but instead will continue innovating and finding new revenue streams? They did just raise $200MM after all.

I'd be more impressed if they could support themselves after 7 years and didn't need investments and an IPO to stay afloat.

Actually they've been previously profitable but keep putting money into expanding the business.
Post reply on HN