Live data from Hacker News

WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

reuters.com

41–50 of 347 posts

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#41
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We is not a tech company.

I agree but are you saying that if it was a tech company, it would be worth the 48 billion? Also, is it THAT much different from AirBnB that is considered a tech company? What 'tech' does AirBnB offer that qualify it is a tech company?

AirBnB is asset free. We is long $47B of leases.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#42
post #23

As someone living in SF, I don’t think anyone in SF or SV would ever consider WeWork to be a “Silicon Valley” company in the same way that Uber or Twitter or Slack is. The company has 0 tech brand among employees (how many ex-FB or ex-Google engineers work there?) and outside of Benchmark’s early round none of the VCs are SV-based. Point is the media is making this out to be an indictment on some SV tech bubble but p…

[deleted]

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#43
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Point is the media is making this out to be an indictment on some SV tech bubble" Its not the media, I think its just true. Had WeWork IPO'ed under the same conditions a year ago, I think it would have been 'fine'. but the glut of SV unicorns losing money, hating investors, and slowing growth has got people highly concerned. This list of companies (slack, lyft, Uber, Pinterest, beyond meat, crowdstrike, tesla, spo…

You're missing Zoom, Pagerduty, and Cloudflare which are all doing phenomenally well.

Thanks, didnt have earnings per share on cloudfare so skipped it

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#44
post #30
post #23

As someone living in SF, I don’t think anyone in SF or SV would ever consider WeWork to be a “Silicon Valley” company in the same way that Uber or Twitter or Slack is. The company has 0 tech brand among employees (how many ex-FB or ex-Google engineers work there?) and outside of Benchmark’s early round none of the VCs are SV-based. Point is the media is making this out to be an indictment on some SV tech bubble but p…

> "Point is the media is making this out to be an indictment on some SV tech bubble" Its not the media, I think its just true. Had WeWork IPO'ed under the same conditions a year ago, I think it would have been 'fine'. but the glut of SV unicorns losing money, hating investors, and slowing growth has got people highly concerned. This list of companies (slack, lyft, Uber, Pinterest, beyond meat, crowdstrike, tesla, spo…

Some of those (e.g. Slack) are growing phenomenally fast though, and could become profitable quite easily. Others (e.g. Uber and Lyft) have a questionable business model.

Edit: wow I didn't realize Slack had such a large market cap. That is a LOT of growth priced in, probably more than is justified.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#46
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how many ex-FB or ex-Google engineers work there? This sounds like an awful metric.

It really isn’t. FB/Goog compensation is still the benchmark as far as industry comp goes, so a private co really needs to be convincingly successful to attract smart, high paid engineers at top tech companies. If they can’t then it’s a completely valid signal that something is up - either comp is well below market, growth story is fishy, management is weak, or something else.

Assumption: smart engineers only care about money.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#47
post #46
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn’t. FB/Goog compensation is still the benchmark as far as industry comp goes, so a private co really needs to be convincingly successful to attract smart, high paid engineers at top tech companies. If they can’t then it’s a completely valid signal that something is up - either comp is well below market, growth story is fishy, management is weak, or something else.

Assumption: smart engineers only care about money.

His assumption is actually that smart engineers would chase good tech, high stock price increase potential. They already have good compensation being Facebook/Google engineers.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#49

WeWork is a real estate company and not a software company. They don't have any worthy propriety tech and their business model is collecting rent. How they were once valued at 47 billion just straight up doesn't make any sense.

And the tech they do have is crappy, error prone, and inconsistent.

If they could figure out how to do printing without PCClient, now that would be a business worth 47B all on it's own...

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#50

Semi related but Blue Apron will forever be my favorite IPO. 5 stock splits and 3 CEOs later, day one investors will receive roughly 2 pennies back for every dollar invested just 2 years ago. Only people who won were those who dumped free shares on the market (insiders), and maybe consumers for getting subsidized food of questionable quality. Once valued at 2 billion USD, a paltry 150 million will get the job done no…

Honest question if anyone knows more details. VCs these days are very focused on the "SaaS Quick Ratio": https://www.cobloom.com/blog/saas-quick-ratio-how-to-measure... (Blue Apron isn't quite a SaaS business but close enough for this metric). The idea is that it not only measures growth, but measures new customers in relation to churn, with the idea that it's a lot easier to have a long term successful business if y…

The metrics, "rules of thumb", and "conventional wisdom" that apply to SaaS businesses do not extrapolate well to non-software subscription businesses. The main reason for this is SaaS has enormous gross margins, often upwards of 90%. This makes revenue a reasonable proxy for (gross) profit. The margins on physical goods are tiny by comparison, for food often in the low single digits, and subletting real estate is not much higher (if at alL). When profit is such a small percentage of revenue you have to be a lot more detailed in the math for lifetime value, acquisition cost, and so on, and you can no longer rely on simple formulas based on revenue and run rate.
Post reply on HN