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

WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 347 posts

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#61

Post by abvdasker »

quaquaqua1 wrote: post #21

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…

I actually still use Blue Apron. It's not that much more expensive than grocery shopping (I live in New York so groceries are expensive) and you never end up with wasted food. The recipes are generally very quick to make and far better than anything I could make on my own in a comparable amount of time. While the business may not have worked out so well their service is still pretty good.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#62

Post by GCA10 »

tempsy wrote: 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…

On the merits, yes, We is not a tech company. But bear in mind that the company has gone to extraordinary lengths to cloak itself in the unicorn-tech narrative. It masquerades as a platform for other services; it ascribes its losses to a work-setting variant of the Uber fast-growth strategy; it draws parallels to Airbnb's disruption of the hotel business, etc.

Yes, Silicon Valley's smartest minds may see through it all. But in routine media coverage, the company's own version of its story (OVOIS) gets much of the ink. It takes a while for more investigative reporters to call BS and defy the company's OVOIS.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#63

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

femto113 wrote: post #50
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

While I agree with many of your points, I'd add that adding in the additional metrics you mention (lifetime value, acquisition cost, etc.) would make Blue Apron look even worse.

My main point is that basically the only thing Blue Apron had going for it was topline growth, but by pretty much every other metric it looked horrible and unsustainable. SaaS quick ratio alone should have clearly highlighted how unsustainable that topline growth was given their through-the-roof churn rates.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#64

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

autokad wrote: post #36
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you need to flip that envelope around because I don't know how you get that much negative revenue.

added link above

Revenue and earnings are not the same thing.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#65

Post by [deleted] »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #34
autokad wrote: 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…

Maybe you need to flip that envelope around because I don't know how you get that much negative revenue.

[deleted]

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#66

Post by pvarangot »

nugget wrote: post #14

Is it true that WeWork is now the largest single lessee of commercial real estate in the US? Seems like a bad bankruptcy could have some broad ripple effects.

Well people are actually using the offices so prices will go down if they backrupt but they'll catch up. It would feel like an adjustment and not a bubble bursting.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#67

Post by mmaunder »

dangxiaopin wrote: post #53
quaquaqua1 wrote: post #21

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…

Pinterest is next https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...

That actually looks catastrophic. Stock price doesn't reflect it yet. Shadenfreude isnt my thing but this looks bad and insiders must already be aware.

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#68

Post by quaquaqua1 »

abvdasker wrote: post #61
quaquaqua1 wrote: post #21

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…

I actually still use Blue Apron. It's not that much more expensive than grocery shopping (I live in New York so groceries are expensive) and you never end up with wasted food. The recipes are generally very quick to make and far better than anything I could make on my own in a comparable amount of time. While the business may not have worked out so well their service is still pretty good.

Glad you like it and hope the price continues to be reasonable as they continue to cut expenses while trying to maintain food quality :)

For me I eat a very peculiar diet so I usually just pick up yogurt and fresh bread from the grocery store on my way home from work, and when I'm feeling particularly lazy I will order steamed chicken and steamed broccoli from the local Chinese shop who really have this amazing technique of steaming that I seem unable to grasp!!

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#69

Post by quaquaqua1 »

mmaunder wrote: post #67
dangxiaopin wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinterest is next https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...

That actually looks catastrophic. Stock price doesn't reflect it yet. Shadenfreude isnt my thing but this looks bad and insiders must already be aware.

Can't believe the market is currently valuing Pinterest at 16B

Re: WeWork parent pulls IPO following pushback: sources

#70

Post by untog »

ummonk wrote: post #40
saagarjha wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's a useful proxy metric, but not a metric to optimize for. I wouldn't want to work for a startup that focused on hiring ex-FB or ex-Google engineers, but given that a large fraction of talented engineers have worked at FB or Google, you'd expect to find plenty of them at any reputable large startup.

> large fraction of talented engineers have worked at FB or Google

I'd actually dispute that. The tech world is really, really big. There are a great many extremely talented engineers that have never worked at FB or Google, but they're also the kind of engineers that don't write blog posts or attend conferences, so they're less visible.

Post reply on HN