article thumbnail

Three Headwinds for Facebook's IPO

Harvard Business Review

When I logged into the site for the first time in the spring of 2004, I was prepared to hate the service. And despite all of Facebook's user support, investors should be skeptical of the company's pricey IPO. There is a lot of emotion behind the Facebook IPO. I don't mean to suggest it will fall 70% in value after its IPO pop.

IPO 12
article thumbnail

Should Everyone Be Allowed to Invest in Private Tech Companies?

Harvard Business Review

In addition, venture firms are constantly scouring for opportunities to get their invested company acquired, which is an increasingly attractive exit route for digital entrepreneurs, given the IPO’s long-drawn process and mandated holding-period requirements for initial investors.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

An Insider’s Account of the Yahoo-Alibaba Deal

Harvard Business Review

The idea was simple: Combine the best of both companies into the new Yahoo China, which was projected to generate more than $25 million in revenue in 2004. We were optimistic about Yahoo’s future in China as the deal closed in January 2004. billion — the world’s biggest internet offering since Google’s IPO in 2004.

article thumbnail

The Dell Deal Explained: What a Successful Turnaround Looks Like

Harvard Business Review

In 2004, Michael Dell left the company, replaced by Kevin Rollins, a former Bain consultant who joined the company in 1996. Lerner has another paper relevant to the Dell case, which looks at the performance of buyout companies'' stock prices after they IPO, including public firms taken private in the deal. The Case of IBM.

Rivkin 15
article thumbnail

What Apple Should Do with Its Massive Piles of Money

Harvard Business Review

But as Apple’s profits multiplied from 2004 through 2011, it was clear that, as you now call it, “ return of capital ” to shareholders was not a pressing priority for Mr. Jobs. You clearly have a different point of view on distributions to shareholders.