Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#101

Post by supster »

revelation wrote: post #89
supster wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, so many people seem to forget this simple fact

This doesn't seem like a "simple fact", rather insanity that has caused many of the economical problems we have seen recently. I don't buy a house expecting to use it 10+ years and still make a buck selling it afterwards. The same way I don't buy a car and expect it to yield me money when it's a broken beater, in fact, the simple fact of buying it immediately devalues it (to others). (I guess this is because (1) the…

The larger point was that incentives flip as soon as you become a homeowner. As a renter, you are hoping for housing prices to go down and would like to see this happen via increased housing supply, deregulation, or even a local economic downturn as someone suggested above. But as soon as you become a homeowner, you want housing prices to level or increase because a large portion of your net worth is tied to it. So you suddenly want new housing supply to shrink, increased developmental regulations, and a booming economy in your area.

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#102

Post by jsn117 »

gtrubetskoy wrote: post #13

All the food trucks, street and market vendors, estate and yard sales, handymen, etc I see accept credit cards using Square. If they figure out how to hang on to this market and grow as these little vendors grow then they're in good shape. Being down 10% when the Dow is down 400+ points for days on is not unusual. The big question is - who is Square competing with.

problem is they already have all the food trucks, where else can they (realistically) expand to?

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#103

Post by cm2012 »

rdl wrote: post #79
boomzilla wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for some people, myself included, the not-going-so-well recent IPOs (Square, Box, etc.) would help deflate the pressure on housing prices in SF/BA. I feel for the workers at these company, but it's becoming impossible to raise a family here when the rent/mortgage is creeping up to more than half of most people's salary.

On the rent front, I doubt it -- salaries are just increasing to match. All-cash comp in the 300-500k range is surprisingly common (at least for 10+ year experience people in hot fields); add any luck on equity, and 2 incomes, and you can afford SF rents as they stand. Being able to reliably get a $300k/yr cash salary (salary+bonus, but still cash) seems more related to absurd rents than 10% of people getting huge eq…

Median household income in SF is 77k, just FYI. Only 16% of SF households make over $200k (this includes 2 earner households, which is probably most of these). This doesn't negate anything in your comment, just adds a little bit.

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#105

Post by elemeno »

arcanus wrote: post #61
ihsw wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add more context to this -- the markets have been sliding since Sunday due to Chinese intervention in the markets (including raising RMB reserves for Chinese banks), and there is a lot of shakeup expected from the lifting of Iranian sanctions and the Saudi Aramco IPO internal debate (could be largest IPO in history and it would be company with the largest market cap in history, yes bigger than Apple's). The enviro…

> it would be company with the largest market cap in history, yes bigger than Apple Apple is not remotely the largest company in history, when adjusted for inflation. The The Dutch East India Company, for instance, was worth over 7 trillion dollars at one point. Likewise, Standard Oil held a monopoly on all the USA's oil at one point and certainly had a several trillion dollar valuation. Saudi Aramco will be massive,…

There was an article in The Guardian this past weekend about Saudi Aramco which estimated it's value at $10tn, which would definitely put it in a league of it's own when it comes to total value.

Saudi Aramco – the $10tn mystery at the heart of the Gulf state - http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/16/saudi-aramco...

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#106

Post by aneesh »

smileysteve wrote: post #40
Silfen wrote: post #4

Someone with a little more knowledge of financial markets, help me out here. Is it really news if a tech company's stock drops 8-10% on a day when NASDAQ is down over 3%?

Mostly if we're discussing how equity compensation might not be the best option. Or how preferred investors and founders took what they could from the workers (in response to "refragmentation"). The Square IPO was less than employees who started after their last round and preferences made it even worse, meaning even though there is a liquidity event, employees who took options are out. With this significant drop, oth…

How did preferences make it worse? Generally, preferred shares convert to common in the event of an IPO, so preferences are discarded.

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#109

Post by pound »

woah wrote: post #99
pound wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to tell that but no, it will not really help with raising a family here. Sadly current prices are new normal and deflated pressure will just let them to not grow further up in near future. (5%-10% drop is nothing for affordability). On another hand looking at what it became I don't even feel sorry for it's future. SF is over and to hell with it. Just a whole bunch of douches.

The real douches are the millionaire homeowners who pushed for restrictive zoning laws for so many years. They've made their fortunes, at the cost of SF mostly only being affordable for the rich.

1) "millionaire homeowners" is pretty much definition of SF. And while roughly 1/3 of SF residents are renters big part of them are temporary here (boom and bust nature of this place, you can call them carpetbaggers) and are just douches who are not homeowners. 2) Doesn't matter who exactly are douches or who can afford SF. SF is ugly place and no victorians can help it. Bigger problem though is that rest of the country can be even uglier.

Re: Square stock drops 10%, is now less than IPO price

#110

Post by pound »

pound wrote: post #109
woah wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real douches are the millionaire homeowners who pushed for restrictive zoning laws for so many years. They've made their fortunes, at the cost of SF mostly only being affordable for the rich.

1) "millionaire homeowners" is pretty much definition of SF. And while roughly 1/3 of SF residents are renters big part of them are temporary here (boom and bust nature of this place, you can call them carpetbaggers) and are just douches who are not homeowners. 2) Doesn't matter who exactly are douches or who can afford SF. SF is ugly place and no victorians can help it. Bigger problem though is that rest of the coun…

I'll add that people are romanticizing SF based on its past. Long gone past.

Present is ugly.

Post reply on HN