Live data from Hacker News

LNKD IPO opens huge at $83

google.com

161–165 of 165 posts

Re: LNKD IPO opens huge at $83

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7% of the total IPO issuance goes to the bankers. This number is consistent across the street. Once upon a time, anti-collusion investigations were threatened because there was no explanation for why every major bank charges exactly 7%

I've often thought that there is no need for collusion if you can exchange minimal information over public, legal channels and know how to work a strategy that assumes a modified prisoners dilemma. You can often see oil prices or airline tickets operating that way. E.g when one airline raises prices, then sees that no-one is following the rise, after which the price comes back down. Or everyone else is ready to raise…

Yup; if judges presiding over anti-trust suits had read Thomas Schelling's book The Strategy of Conflict, there would be many more broken-up oligopolies than there are now.

Re: LNKD IPO opens huge at $83

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of that goes to crystal trophies and high-fiving brokers that made the deal happen?

They get a chunk of the other 300m.

Actually it looks like more a chunk:

"By underpricing the stock, Morgan and BOFA gave their best institutional clients a gift of at least $175 million"

http://www.businessinsider.com/linked-in-ipo-2011-5-b

Re: LNKD IPO opens huge at $83

#163
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During the first 30 days after an IPO, the underwriters are not allowed to lend shares for short sale. Additionally, number of shares are limited. The entire float is not available on the first day of trading. So today, it is probably impossible to short. 30 days from now, it should be available to short. http://cash.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/062905.asp

put options?

Options are available for trading only after a certain number of days (generally 60 to 90 days, but in some cases much earlier than that).

Re: LNKD IPO opens huge at $83

#164
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't treat monopoly money like real money. Stunning. Next the professor should see how risk adverse these students are with their own tuition dollars. Suddenly these kids aren't the big rollers they were with imaginary risk. Quit looking at numbers, follow the risk. Numbers are relative to risk. Consider the influence of monetary policy on risk. Does a cheaper dollar make a frugal investor? Hardly.

Or you could listen to the podcast and find out that it was real money, but why let facts get in the way?

Link?
Post reply on HN