When to Say No to an IPO

Are you planning to invest in an IPO either because you are getting the shares at par value or because the company you are investing in is sound and stable? WAIT!! Play safe and ensure you are not duped.

Par value is the face value of the share. This par value is arrived at through an accounting decision and bears no relation to either the intrinsic value of the company or how the public view the company. For example, XYZ Co. share has a par value of Rs 5, but it's market price could be around Rs 3,000 per share. When the share is traded in the stock market, however, this value may go up or down depending on the supply of and demand for the stock. If everyone wants to buy the shares, the price will go up. If nobody wants to buy them, and/ or many want to sell them, the price will fall. This price is referred to as the market price. A share with a face value of Rs 10 may be quoted at Rs 55 (market price higher than the face value) or even Rs 9 (market price lower than the face value).

The fact that you are getting shares at par value is no guarantee that the company is going to do well and you are going to rake in big bucks. Often, most companies come out with shares that are at a premium to their face value. Those that come with shares at face value seem to appear more alluring.

Some companies whose shares are already available for trading come out with a fresh lot of shares. This is referred to as a new issue or a Follow-on Public Issue (FPO). A common bait investors fall for is the fact that the price of the new issue is cheaper than the current market price. For example, the current market share may be Rs 100, while the FPO may be offered at Rs 90.

Don't let this be the only reason you buy those shares. Sometimes, the prices of the stock may get manipulated in the market to keep the prices high before a new issue is announced. So, while you think you are getting a good deal because the shares are available at a discount to the market price, the reality is that the market price has been artificially hyped up because of manipulation by brokers.

A share that is being oversubscribed does not mean it's a good investment for you. The process is that investors have to bid for shares in an IPO. When the bids exceed the number of shares, the issue is said to be oversubscribed. There could be a number of reasons why this happens.It could be that many banks and financial institutions are liberally offering loans to apply for the issue. This could result in oversubscription. Also, institutional investors (as against retail investors like you and me) don't have to put up money upfront when they make their bids. That means they can put in any amount of bids, hoping that the resulting hype about oversubscription will lure more investors.

At the same time, just because you are investing in a sound and stable company, it does not mean you have to pay a very high price for it. It would be a futile investment if the company was excellent but the price of the issue was sky high.

So think about these issues next time you go shopping (IPO shopping that is ;-) )

When to Say Yes to an IPO

When the stock market is on fire, everybody seems to be making money on IPOs. You buy an IPO for a simple reason: you get it cheaper. Often, companies come out with a cheaper issue price. An issue price is the price at which you can buy a share when you apply for an IPO. When the shares are listed on the stock exchange and are available for trading, the price generally rises.

Take, for example, the Jet Airways IPO. It had an issue price of Rs 1,100 per share. On March 14, 2005, the day it was listed and made available for trading, the price rose to a high of Rs 1,339. In just a few weeks, you would have made a profit of more than Rs 200 per share.

So, besides getting the shares cheaper, those who want to make a quick buck sell it soon after it is listed. Within a short span of a few weeks, they make a neat profit.

This is the reason why investors flock to IPOs.

It is not mandatory that the price of the stock rises on listing. There could be instances where it does not. Much depends on the timing of your sale. The price may rise on listing, but you may hold on for just a few days longer and it could slump. Those who invested in the Jet Airways IPO at Rs 1,100 per share were thrilled as the share price kept rising. Soon after listing (as we mentioned above), the price rose. On March 14, 2005, it was Rs 1,339 per share and rose to Rs 1,361 per share on June 1, 2005. However, after that, it has generally been going downhill. On December 6, 2005 it touched Rs 1,269; on January 6, 2006, it was Rs 1,148. On February 3, 2006, it was Rs 983.Those who did not sell at the initial levels would be rather dismayed.

The best reason to invest in an IPO is because you believe in the company and are willing to hold on to the shares for the long term. Often, companies that are going public offer their shares cheap and go on to become very successful. An IPO thus offer investors the chance to participate in the company's potential prosperity.While the chief attraction may be making a profit the moment the price of the share rises, don't let it be the only one.

Asset Allocation for Dummies

Asset allocation is dividing and allocating your money (or investable assets) among different asset classes. For example, asset allocation may be as simple as dividing your money equally among stock index funds and bonds or dividing it among large-caps, mid-caps, and small caps. An asset allocation plan (also known as an investment plan) is important because without an investment plan, people tend to buy what they shouldn’t buy! I know a lot of people who invest their savings in the fund that performed the best last year. The chances of that fund performing better this year are pretty slim.

The importance of asset allocation can be best understood with the help of an example. Suppose I invest in the following manner according to my asset allocation plan:

25% or Rs. 25,000 - Large-Cap fund

25% or Rs. 25,000 - Mid-Cap fund

25% or Rs. 25,000 - Small-Cap fund

25% or Rs. 25,000 - Bond fund

Let’s say the different funds had the following rates of return this year:

Year I

+10% - Large-Cap fund

+08% - Mid-Cap fund

+15% - Small-Cap fund

-02% - Bond fund

My portfolio would look like this:

The formula for calculating return for one year is:

Beginning Amount * (1 + the rate of return )

25,000 * 1.10 = 27,500 Large-Cap fund

25,000 * 1.08 = 27,000 Mid-Cap fund

25,000 * 1.15 = 28,750 Small-Cap fund

25,000 * 0.98 = 24,500 Bond fund

Total Portfolio value at end of Year I = 107,750 or a 7.75% rate of return.

Most people would probably want to sell all of their bond fund and put it all in the small-cap fund. That’s human nature. Nobody likes to hold an investment that seems to be losing money. However, suppose the next year, the fund’s returns were like this:

Year II

- 05% - Large-Cap fund

+03% - Mid-Cap fund

- 20% - Small-Cap fund

+05% - Bond fund

At the end of Year II, the portfolio would like this:

27,500 * 0.95 = 26,125 Large-Cap fund

27,000 * 1.03 = 27,810 Mid-Cap fund

53,250 * 0.80 = 42,600 Small-Cap fund

The portfolio would be worth Rs. 96,535 (one year LOSS of 10.41%!)

Finally, had this person stuck with his asset allocation plan and reallocated 25% to each of the 4 funds, he would have had a loss of only 4.25% instead of 10.41%:

26,937 * 0.95 = 25,950 Large-Cap fund

26,937 * 1.03 = 27,810 Mid-Cap fund

26,937 * 0.80 = 21,550 Small-Cap fund

26,937 * 1.05 = 28,284 Bond fund

The portfolio would be worth Rs. 103,170 (one year loss of 4.25% which is MUCH better than the 10.41% loss)

Specialized Knowledge = Dirt Cheap

An advise - Whenever you need something done requiring specialized knowledge or skill, go to a college campus. There are thousands of students and professors who have the knowledge you seek (such as programming, web design or anything else) and will do your work for free (well...almost for free).

Just put up a poster/notice inviting students/teachers to do your work. "You will get Rs. 2000 + a valuable certificate on the spot if you do (insert specialized task here) for our company" and trust me, you will ALWAYS find a taker!

The Top Ten Lies of Entrepreneurs

Yet another exposé by Guy - the top ten lies of entrepreneurs

• “Our projections are conservative.” An entrepreneur's projections are never conservative. If they were, they would be $0. I have never seen an entrepreneur achieve even her most conservative projections. Generally, an entrepreneur has no idea what sales will be, so she guesses: “Too little will make my deal uninteresting; too big, and I'll look hallucinogenic.” The result is that everyone's projections are $50 million in year four. As a rule of thumb, when I see a projection, I add one year to delivery time and multiply by .1.
• “(Big name research firm) says our market will be $50 billion in 2010.” Every entrepreneur has a few slides about how the market potential for his segment is tens of billions. It doesn't matter if the product is bar mitzah planning software or 802.11 chip sets. Venture capitalists don't believe this type of forecast because it's the fifth one of this magnitude that they've heard that day. Entrepreneurs would do themselves a favor by simply removing any reference to market size estimates from consulting firms.
• “(Big name company) is going to sign our purchase order next week.” This is the “I heard I have to show traction at a conference” lie of entrepreneurs. The funny thing is that next week, the purchase order still isn't signed. Nor the week after. The decision maker gets laid off, the CEO gets fired, there's a natural disaster, whatever. The only way to play this card if AFTER the purchase order is signed because no investor whose money you'd want will fall for this one.
• “Key employees are set to join us as soon as we get funded.” More often than not when a venture capitalist calls these key employees who are VPs are Microsoft, Oracle, and Sun, he gets the following response, “Who said that? I recall meeting him at a Churchill Club meeting, but I certainly didn't say I would leave my cush $250,000/year job at Adobe to join his startup.” If it's true that key employees are ready to rock and roll, have them call the venture capitalist after the meeting and testify to this effect.
• “No one is doing what we're doing.” This is a bummer of a lie because there are only two logical conclusions. First, no one else is doing this because there is no market for it. Second, the entrepreneur is so clueless that he can't even use Google to figure out he has competition. Suffice it to say that the lack of a market and cluelessness is not conducive to securing an investment. As a rule of thumb, if you have a good idea, five companies are going the same thing. If you have a great idea, fifteen companies are doing the same thing.
• “No one can do what we're doing.” If there's anything worse than the lack of a market and cluelessness, it's arrogance. No one else can do this until the first company does it, and ten others spring up in the next ninety days. Let's see, no one else ran a sub four-minute mile after Roger Bannister. (It took only a month before John Landy did). The world is a big place. There are lots of smart people in it. Entrepreneurs are kidding themselves if they think they have any kind of monopoly on knowledge. And, sure as I'm a Macintosh user, on the same day that an entrepreneur tells this lie, the venture capitalist will have met with another company that's doing the same thing.
• “Hurry because several other venture capital firms are interested.” The good news: There are maybe one hundred entrepreneurs in the world who can make this claim. The bad news: The fact that you are reading a blog about venture capital means you're not one of them. As my mother used to say, “Never play Russian roulette with an Uzi.” For the absolute cream of the crop, there is competition for a deal, and an entrepreneur can scare other investors to make a decision. For the rest of us, don't think one can create a sense of scarcity when it's not true. Re-read the previous blog about the lies of venture capitalists, to learn how entrepreneurs are hearing “maybe” when venture capitalists are saying “no.”
• “Oracle is too big/dumb/slow to be a threat.” Larry Ellison has his own jet. He can keep the San Jose Airport open for his late night landings. His boat is so big that it can barely get under the Golden Gate Bridge. Meanwhile, entrepreneurs are flying on Southwest out of Oakland and stealing the free peanuts. There's a reason why Larry is where he is, and entrepreneurs are where they are, and it's not that he's big, dumb, and slow. Competing with Oracle, Microsoft, and other large companies is a very difficult task. Entrepreneurs who utter this lie look at best naive. You think it's bravado, but venture capitalists think it's stupidity.
• “We have a proven management team.” Says who? Because the founder worked at Morgan Stanley for a summer? Or McKinsey for two years? Or he made sure that John Sculley's Macintosh could power on? Truly “proven” in a venture capitalist's eyes is founder of a company that returned billions to its investors. But if the entrepreneur were that proven, that he (a) probably wouldn't have to ask for money; (b) wouldn't be claiming that he's proven. (Do you think Wayne Gretzky went around saying, “I am a good hockey player”?) A better strategy is for the entrepreneur to state that (a) she has relevant industry experience; (b) she is going to do whatever it takes to succeed; (c) she is going to surround herself with directors and advisors who are proven; and (d) she'll step aside whenever it becomes necessary. This is good enough for a venture capitalist that believes in what the entrepreneur is doing.
• “Patents make our product defensible.” The optimal number of times to use the P word in a presentation is one. Just once, say, “We have filed patents for what we are doing.” Done. The second time you say it, venture capitalists begin to suspect that you are depending too much on patents for defensibility. The third time you say it, you are holding a sign above your head that says, “I am clueless.” Sure, you should patent what you're doing--if for no other reason than to say it once in your presentation. But at the end of the patents are mostly good for impressing your parents. You won't have the time or money to sue anyone with a pocket deep enough to be worth suing.
• “All we have to do is get 1% of the market.” (Here's a bonus since I still have battery power.) This lie is the flip side of “the market will be $50 billion.” There are two problems with this lie. First, no venture capitalist is interested in a company that is looking to get 1% or so of a market. Frankly, we want our companies to face the wrath of the anti-trust division of the Department of Justice. Second, it's also not that easy to get 1% of any market, so you look silly pretending that it is. Generally, it's much better for entrepreneurs to show a realistic appreciation of the difficulty of building a successful company.

The Top Ten Lies of Venture Capitalists

Here is an exposé by Guy of the top ten lies of venture capitalists.

• “I liked your company, but my partners didn't.” In other words, “no.” What the sponsor is trying to get the entrepreneur to believe is that he's the good guy, the smart guy, the guy who gets it; the “others” didn't, so don't blame him. This is a cop out; it's not the other partners didn't like the deal as much as the sponsor wasn't a true believer. A true believer would get it done.
• "If you get a lead, we will follow.” In other words, “no.” As the old Japanese say, “If your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle.” Well, she doesn't have balls, so it doesn't matter. The venture capitalist is saying, “ We don't really believe, but if you can get Sequoia to lead, we'll jump on the pile.” In other words, once the entrepreneur doesn't need the money, the venture capitalist would be happy to give him some more--this is like saying, “Once you've stopped Larry Csonka cold, we'll help you tackle him.” What entrepreneurs want to hear is, “If you can't get a lead, we will.” That's a believer.
• “Show us some traction, and we'll invest.” In other words, “no.” This lie translates to “I don't believe your story, but if you can prove it by achieving significant revenue, then you might convince me. However, I don't want to tell you 'no' because I might be wrong and by golly you may sign up a Fortune 500 customer and then I'd look like a total orifice.”
• “We love to co-invest with other venture capitalists.” Like the sun rising and Canadians playing hockey, you can depend on the greed of venture capitalists. Greed in this business translates to “If this is a good deal, I want it all.” What entrepreneurs want to hear is, “We want the whole round. We don't want any other investors.” Then it's the entrepreneur's job to convince them why other investors can make the pie bigger as opposed to re-configuring the slices.
• “We're investing in your team.” This is an incomplete statement. While it's true that they are investing in the team, entrepreneurs are hearing, “We won't fire you--why would we fire you if we invested because of you?” That's not what the venture capitalist is saying at all. What she is saying is, “We're investing in your team as long as things are going well, but if they go bad we will fire your ass because no one is indispensable.”
• “I have lots of bandwidth to dedicate to your company.” Maybe the venture capitalist is talking about the T3 line into his office, but he's not talking about his personal calendar because he's already on ten boards. Counting board meetings, an entrepreneur should assume that a venture capitalist will spend between five to ten hours a month on a company. That's it. Deal with it. And make board meetings short!
• “This is a vanilla term sheet.” There is no such thing as a vanilla term sheet. Do you think corporate finance attorneys are paid $400/hour to push out vanilla term sheets? If entrepreneurs insist on using a flavor of ice cream to describe term sheets, the only flavor that works is Rocky Road. This is why they need their own $400/hour attorney too--as opposed to Uncle Joe the divorce lawyer.
• “We can open up doors for you at our client companies.” This is a double whammy of lie. First, a venture capitalist can't always open up doors at client companies. Frankly, he might be hated by the client company. The worst thing in the world may be a referral from him. Second, even if the venture capitalist can open the door, entrepreneurs can't seriously expect the company to commit to your product--that is, something that isn't much more than a slick (10/20/30) PowerPoint presentation.
• “We like early-stage investing.” Venture capitalists fantasize about putting $1 million into a $2 million pre-money company and end up owning 33% of the next Google. That's early stage investing. Do you know why we all know about Google's amazing return on investment? The same reason we all know about Michael Jordan: Googles and Michael Jordans hardly ever happen. If they were common, no one would write about them. If you scratch beneath the surface, venture capitalists want to invest in proven teams (eg., the founders of Cisco) with proven technology (eg., the basis of a Nobel Prize) in a proven market (eg., ecommerce). We are remarkably risk averse considering it's not even our money.

Free in-home wireless broadband!

Finally!

Google TiSP (BETA) is a fully functional, end-to-end system that provides in-home wireless access by connecting your commode-based TiSP wireless router to one of thousands of TiSP Access Nodes via fiber-optic cable strung through your local municipal sewage lines.

PS: That's google's way of wishing you a very happy fool's day ;-)