31–40 of 54 posts
Maybe they can turn this around by offering their stock for 50% off normal ticker prices. Then surely people, having bought it once and discovered how awesome it is, will come back again and again to pay full price.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>that have filled Groupon's pockets with over a billion in cash. Having 'cash on hand' is great but it seems that groupon owes more than they have by a considerable margin: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Groupon-is-Effectively-minyanv... Also that article says they have 208 million in cash, not nearly the 1.6 billion that you mention.
Revenue is also cash - before expenses [they are collecting this amount]. I'm not suggesting that Groupon's 'operations activities' aren't responsible for pulling/keeping them in the red. However, investors like Warren Buffet look for high-earning and unprofitable companies quite frequently to get involved with - companies like Groupon. Reason being, with some direction by a strong [/new] board of directors (majority…
If a company has 100K in revenues and 50K in expenses per month after one month they'll have 50K in cash, to give a very limited example.
So you have to take the revenues and reduce them by the burn rate to get an idea of how big groupons war chest really is.
According to groupons own filings they've got 208 million in the bank so they've spent a good 1.4 billion of that money they took in.
Of course 200+ million is still not exactly pocket change.
I don't quite follow the Warren Buffet link, his only comment on groupon as far as I know is that he said he'd read their IPO filing papers but that was about it.
The investors/founders who took so much off the table, in their previous rounds, should put most of it back in, if they're so confident. For example, Mason cashed out about $28 million, and Lefkowsky about $382 million. Reinvesting most of that would speak louder than another 'quirky' bit of made-to-leak copywriting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>that have filled Groupon's pockets with over a billion in cash. Having 'cash on hand' is great but it seems that groupon owes more than they have by a considerable margin: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Groupon-is-Effectively-minyanv... Also that article says they have 208 million in cash, not nearly the 1.6 billion that you mention.
Revenue is also cash - before expenses [they are collecting this amount]. I'm not suggesting that Groupon's 'operations activities' aren't responsible for pulling/keeping them in the red. However, investors like Warren Buffet look for high-earning and unprofitable companies quite frequently to get involved with - companies like Groupon. Reason being, with some direction by a strong [/new] board of directors (majority…
Please read an Accounting 101 textbook to learn why this isn't true.
Maybe they can turn this around by offering their stock for 50% off normal ticker prices. Then surely people, having bought it once and discovered how awesome it is, will come back again and again to pay full price.
Maybe they can turn this around by offering their stock for 50% off normal ticker prices. Then surely people, having bought it once and discovered how awesome it is, will come back again and again to pay full price.
That won't work because they'll just attract the worst kind of cheapskate investor demographic, who'll move on to the next penny stock once the discount is expired.
Exactly (the OP was being sarcastic :)
Maybe they can turn this around by offering their stock for 50% off normal ticker prices. Then surely people, having bought it once and discovered how awesome it is, will come back again and again to pay full price.
The investors/founders who took so much off the table, in their previous rounds, should put most of it back in, if they're so confident. For example, Mason cashed out about $28 million, and Lefkowsky about $382 million. Reinvesting most of that would speak louder than another 'quirky' bit of made-to-leak copywriting.
$382MM? Why did the investors consent to that? That's a lot more than is needed to stop worrying about the founders selling the company to keep paying their bills.