11–20 of 44 posts
Hmmm, the seismic shift from MoreLikelyToIPO to MoreLikelyToGetAcquired happened around the same time as Enron and its ensuing government yoke, Sarbanes-Oxley. Coincidence? I doubt it. When compliance raises expenses 1%, no big deal. But if that number approaches 50% for small, nimble, well-leveraged tech start-ups, then public markets become closed to them. SOX is an awfully big variable to not be considered.
Hmmm, the seismic shift from MoreLikelyToIPO to MoreLikelyToGetAcquired happened around the same time as Enron and its ensuing government yoke, Sarbanes-Oxley. Coincidence? I doubt it. When compliance raises expenses 1%, no big deal. But if that number approaches 50% for small, nimble, well-leveraged tech start-ups, then public markets become closed to them. SOX is an awfully big variable to not be considered.
Recall the high unemployment rate; the government has dumped money into several tried-and-true methods to stimulate growth and bring back jobs, but whatever growth we've seen in the last few quarters hasn't translated into expansion of operations. We can infer from this picture that companies are sitting on their money and spending frugally. They did so in the early 2000s as well. SOX explains why it's hard for a small-to-mid-cap to break out, but it doesn't explain why existing big businesses would restrict their spending.
My conjecture, which I don't have a watertight case for, is that business(as a whole) doesn't want to grow, or can increasingly meet growth targets via productivity alone, and so the whole rationale driving IPOs - and the capital/labor side of the economy - is broken.
Hmmm, the seismic shift from MoreLikelyToIPO to MoreLikelyToGetAcquired happened around the same time as Enron and its ensuing government yoke, Sarbanes-Oxley. Coincidence? I doubt it. When compliance raises expenses 1%, no big deal. But if that number approaches 50% for small, nimble, well-leveraged tech start-ups, then public markets become closed to them. SOX is an awfully big variable to not be considered.
[deleted]
I agree that building a company to quickly flip or IPO is going to be increasingly difficult, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for growth and innovation in the field. After all, MS started during the recession of the 70's...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
Is that all we're about though? Building some silly widget, and then finding some sucker to buy it, and then laughing all the way to the bank? If that's the case, then how are we any different than the guys on Wall Street pushing credit swaps? That's not a sustainable model. I agree that building a company to quickly flip or IPO is going to be increasingly difficult, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for growth…
- US venture capital industry is expected to shrink considerably (http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/13/report-u-s-venture-capital-...)
- Immigration brain drain takes place. Only 18,000 applications had been filed for regular H-1Bs so far this year. (http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/14/news/economy/immigration_bra...)
- US manufacturing jobs keep slipping away, and the trend will likely continue - Nation's 100 biggest markets have lost ~40% jobs compared to a decade ago (http://buffalo.bizjournals.com/buffalo/blog/the_score/2010/0...)
We need to act now to reverse these long term trends, otherwise innovation will dissipate rather quickly, as the world braces austerity and the second US recession
Hmmm, the seismic shift from MoreLikelyToIPO to MoreLikelyToGetAcquired happened around the same time as Enron and its ensuing government yoke, Sarbanes-Oxley. Coincidence? I doubt it. When compliance raises expenses 1%, no big deal. But if that number approaches 50% for small, nimble, well-leveraged tech start-ups, then public markets become closed to them. SOX is an awfully big variable to not be considered.
SOX took effect in late 2002, but the big seismic shift had happened by 2001 (look at the drop-off in IPOs between 2000 and 2001, which never recovered). Seems like the dot-com crash leading to greatly decreased public demand for tech shares is a lot more likely explanation.
Never mind the crazy IPO levels of bubble years 1999-2000. Why can't we get back to the modest 100-200 IPOs a year of the early 1990s?
US is in for another lost decade ahead for innovation, as: - US venture capital industry is expected to shrink considerably ( http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/13/report-u-s-venture-capital-... ) - Immigration brain drain takes place. Only 18,000 applications had been filed for regular H-1Bs so far this year. ( http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/14/news/economy/immigration_bra... ) - US manufacturing jobs keep slipping away, a…
Given that the whole capital structure is in a state of flux right now with the reality of deflation (the exit of money from the system) while massive inflation is going on at the same time (the creation of new money not the increase in prices) why should we expect much of anything good to come out of the next ten years? I think that a lot of people will take their ideas and implement them on a smaller scale and grow…
That's scary because Web 2.0 companies aren't the be-all end-all of the world. We're in a decidedly fantastic spot, don't get me wrong. However, people are going to need batteries that last longer, they'll want windows in their houses that change shade, or soil that repairs and replenishes itself (South America looking at you.) This type of thing takes the hard money web companies don't need. It's the real source of…
When asked what are the areas of future growth/innovation he said: energy, water management and green technologies.
My take on this is that software has changed so much, that it became kind of enabling/supporting service that nobody can do anything without, i.e. even in green tech field (assuming it indeed is going to be huge) there's plenty of code to be written (and sold)
US is in for another lost decade ahead for innovation, as: - US venture capital industry is expected to shrink considerably ( http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/13/report-u-s-venture-capital-... ) - Immigration brain drain takes place. Only 18,000 applications had been filed for regular H-1Bs so far this year. ( http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/14/news/economy/immigration_bra... ) - US manufacturing jobs keep slipping away, a…
Manufacturing jobs are disappearing but real manufacturing output has actually been steadily increasing over the last 50 years.