Stingy Investor Search - Contact - Subscribe - Login
  Home | Articles | Links | SNW
Facebook's IPO

Facebook created quite a stir when it recently sold shares to the public for the first time. But despite benefiting from a deluge of hype, the launch disappointed many short-term speculators. Investors, on the other hand, are more interested in the stock's long-term prospects.

But before addressing Facebook's particulars, it is useful to take a brief look at the process. Most companies start off as private concerns and are owned by their founders. So, what motivates them to sell shares to the public? There are several reasons but they boil down to two: the owners want to cash out or they want more money in the firm's bank account for growth, the repayment of debt, or some other purpose. Naturally enough, it is possible to do a bit of both at the same time.

When a stock goes public some of its shares are sold via brokers to their clients. (Typically only very large institutions and the well connected need apply.) The stock then starts trading on a stock exchange where the general public can buy and sell it. The process is known as an initial public offering or IPO.

Most IPOs come with a large side order of risk. As a result, you should ask many questions before buying them. For instance, you should wonder why the shares are being sold to the public by presumably knowledgeable insiders. Perhaps the future for the firm isn't quite so bright? Might the founder be selling at a cyclical high and getting out while the going is good?

Professor Jay Ritter of the University of Florida tracks the performance of U.S. stocks after their initial public offerings and his work is illuminating. It turns out that private owners sell their firms, or parts thereof, to the public at rather fortuitous times.

For instance, Professor Ritter calculates that U.S. IPOs have gained an average of 17.9% on their first day of trading based on data from 1980 to 2011. However, that average was bolstered by unusually strong returns seen during the internet bubble of the late 1990s. Apart from such periods of wild enthusiasm, the initial pop for an IPO tends to be less than 10%.

Low initial price gains are generally the rule because sensible owners don't want to sell at a discount when the market is willing to pay more. On the other hand, big first day surges indicate that they left money on the table.

As it happens Facebook appears to have cleared the table reasonably well. The stock was launched at $38.00 per share, hit a high of $45.00 per share during the first day of trading, and then slumped back to close the day at $38.23 per share. While the lack of a big pop may have disappointed brokers and early buyers, its previous owners extracted their pound of flesh.

However, the average return for IPOs after their first day of trading is generally poor. Professor Ritter calculates that IPOs go on to underperform stocks of a similar size by an average of 3.3 percentage points a year over the next five years based on data from 1970 to 2011. That's a pretty miserable history and it indicates that investors should wait a few years before buying newly listed firms. Indeed, Facebook may be disappointing a littler earlier than usual because its stock slumped 11%, to $34.03 per share, on its second day of trading.

The core problem with IPOs is that they tend to be sold at relatively high valuations when investors are overly enthusiastic about the firm's prospects. True to form, Facebook's stock is quite expensive based on traditional valuation metrics. At the end of the first day of trading, the firm sold at about 29 times 2011's sales and at roughly 110 times earnings.

Both ratios are incredibly high and assume extraordinary growth rates that may not be possible. After all, Facebook has already captured a big slice of its market and it might not attract enough new users to power growth. In addition, it isn't clear that the firm can increase the amount of revenue it generates per user without driving some of them away.

At the end of the day, super high growth rates rarely materialize for large U.S. companies for any length of time. That's a big reason why the 10% of stocks with the highest price-to-sales ratios in the U.S. often disappoint as investments. James O'Shaughnessy determined that such stocks have underperformed the markets by an average of 5.5 percentage points a year from 1964 to 2010 in a study for his book What Works on Wall Street. High price-to-sales ratios are toxic to returns.

The situation is compounded by the decision of Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook's CEO and founder, to maintain control of the company by issuing both single and multiple voting shares. These arrangements are all too common in Canada where they have a lamentable history of allowing founders to divert more than their fair share of a firm's wealth into their own pockets. Although it is not clear that Facebook will follow such a path, such a possibility has to be counted as a risk factor.

To put it succinctly, most value investors wouldn't touch Facebook's stock with a ten foot pole at this point. But a combination of falling prices and improved fundamentals may make it a good deal in a few years.

+ First Published: MoneySense magazine, Summer 2012

Globe & Mail Articles

 Dividend All-Stars for 2024
 250 Megastars for 2024
 Extreme yields
 The easy way
 Smaller stable dividend
 250 Megastars for 2023
 Champagne portfolio
 Screaming Value
 Blended momentum
 Dividend monster
 Frugal dividend
 Stable dividend
 Speads and recessions
 TSX 60 for value investors
 Looking at 10-year returns
 Watching for a bottom
 Oh, bother!
 Indexing advice
 Media-shy stocks
 Curse of size
 Market uncertainty
 Be even lazier
 Scary beats safe
 Small, illiquid, value
 Use the numbers
 What value is good value?
 Sculpt for value
 Value vs CAPE
 Graham Rules
 CAPE vs PeakE
 Top value ratio
 Low Beta
 Value and dividends
 Walter Schloss
 Try unloved AIG
 Why I'm a value investor
 New world of ETFs
 Low P/Es possible
 10 yielders
 Be happier
 Dividend Downside
 Shiller's P/E
 Copycat investing
 Cashing in on class
 Index roulette
 Theory collides
 Diving too deep
 3 retirement villains
 Scourge of inflation
 Economic omens
 Analyst Expectations
 Value stock scarcity
 It's all in the index
 How to pick good funds
 Low Beta Wins
 Hunt for dividend stocks
 Think garage sale

MoneySaver Articles
 2 Graham Stocks for 2018
 2 Stingy Stocks for 2017
 2 Graham Stocks for 2017
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2016
 5 Graham Stocks for 2016
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2015
 3 Graham Stocks for 2015
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2014
 4 Graham Stocks for 2014
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2013
 6 Graham Stocks for 2013
 9 Stingy Stocks for 2012
 8 Graham Stocks for 2012
 Simple Way 2011
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2011
 7 Graham Stocks for 2011
 Simple Way 2010
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2010
 8 Graham Stocks for 2010
 Simple Way 2009
 Timing Temptation
 19 Stingy Stocks for 2009
 4 Graham Stocks for 2009
 Simple Way 2008
 Active at Passive Prices
 Unbundling ETFs 2008
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2008
 5 Graham Stocks for 2008
 Is your index too active?
 Graham's Simple Way
 Canadian Graham Stocks
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2007
 8 Graham Stocks for 2007
 Top SPPs
 The Simple Way
 A hole in your IPO?
 Monkey Business
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2006
 Graham Stock Gainers
 Blue-Chip Blues
 Are Dividends Safe?
 SPPs for 2005
 Graham's Simplest Way
 Selling Graham Stocks
 RRSP Money Market Funds
 Stingy Stocks for 2005
 High Performance Graham
 Intelligent Indexing
 Unbundling Canadian ETFs
 A history of yield
 A Dynamic Duo
 Canadian Graham Stock
 Dividends at Risk
 Thrifty Value Stocks
 Stocks in Short Supply
 The New Dividend
 Hunting Goodwill
 SPPs for 2003
 RRSP: don't panic
 Desirable Dividends
 Stingy Selections 2003
 10 Graham Picks
 Growth Eh?
 Timing Disaster
 Dangerous Diversification
 The Coffee Can Portfolio
 Down with the dogs
 Stingy Selections
 Frugal Funds
 Graham Revisited
 Just Spend It
 Ticker Temptation
 Stock Mortality
 Focus on Fees
 SPPs for the Long Term
 Seeking Solid Stocks
 Relative Strength
 The VR Approach
 The Irrational Investor
 Value Investing

Old MS Articles
 Cdn Top 200 2018
 Cdn Top 200 2017
 Cdn Top 200 2016
 Cdn Top 200 2015
 Cdn Top 200 2014
 Cdn Top 200 2013
 Cdn Top 200 2012
 Cdn Top 200 2011
 Cdn Top 200 2010
 Cdn Top 200 2009
 Cdn Top 200 2008
 Cdn Top 200 2007
 Cdn Top 200 2006
 Cdn Top 200 2005
 US Top 500 2018
 US Top 500 2017
 US Top 500 2016
 US Top 500 2015
 US Top 500 2014
 US Top 500 2013
 US Top 500 2012
 US Top 500 2011
 US Top 500 2010
 US Top 500 2009
 US Top 500 2008
 US Top 500 2007
 US Top 1000 2006
 Dividends 100 2017
 Dividends 100 2016
 Retirement 100 2015
 Retirement 100 2014
 Retirement 100 2013
 Retirement 100 2012
 Retirement 100 2011
 Retirement 100 2010
 Income 100 2009
 Income 100 2008
 Income 100 2007
 Top Trusts 2006
 Top Trusts 2005
 Hot Potato
 Buffett Buys
 Stocks that pay
 Value in the S&P500
 Where to invest $100k
 Where to invest $10k
 Summer Simple Way
 A crystal ball for stocks?
 Cheap & safe
 Risky business
 Dividend investing
 Value investing
 Momentum investing
 Low P/E P/B
 Dividend growers
 Graham's prescription
 The case for optimism
 Wicked investments
 Simply spectacular
 Small stocks, big profits
 Value that sizzles
 So simple it works
 No assembly required
 Investing by the book
 Invest like the masters
 A simple way to get rich
 Stocks for cannibals
 Car bites dogs
 So easy, so profitable
 Dogs of the Dow
 Money for nothing
 Yield of dreams
 Return of the master

Advisor's Edge Articles
 Passive Rebundling
 Doing the math

Flip Books

About Us | Legal | Contact Us
Disclaimers: Consult with a qualified investment adviser before trading. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, financial advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. More...