As plain as the nose on your face

I’m reprising a note written 4 years ago.

An extract from it is, “As a private company Uber raised $25 billion over 33 rounds while Google raised a paltry $36 million over 4 rounds.”

Once upon a time, companies became publicly listed much earlier in their corporate lives, allowing public market investors to participate in, and benefit from, a substantial portion of their growth and capital appreciation.

Over the past decade, however, this has changed considerably. Companies are remaining privately held for much longer, building enormous valuations under the fashionable label of “unicorns” before eventually coming to market.

The consequence is that much of the value creation is now being captured by a relatively small group of founders, insiders, venture capital firms and early-stage investors, rather than the broader investing public.

By the time these companies reach the stockmarket, much of the extraordinary capital appreciation has already occurred. In many instances, the IPO serves less as an opportunity for public investors to participate in the company’s next phase of growth and more as a liquidity event for those who got in years earlier.

Put another way, public market investors are increasingly being invited to provide the exit liquidity, rather than participate in the wealth creation.

Consider Uber, Airbnb, DoorDash, Pinterest and Coinbase, among others. Despite their enormous profiles, disruptive business models and, in some cases, extraordinary private-market valuations, their share price performances since listing have been mixed, with several delivering relatively ordinary returns compared with the wealth created before their IPOs.

Now, we are seeing a new wave of IPO’s from SpaceX, Anthropic, Stripe, Discord, Canva and OpenAI.

Feel free to also reference last month’s note titled, “Stockbrokers are not your mates”

I predict that by the end of the decade, there will be some sad and broken looking equity portfolios.

October 20, 2026

rob@karriasset.com.au

What if Amazon’s share price halves?

I think #Amazon‘s stock price can trade down to $122 within the year 2025.

Whether it occurs in 2025 is inconsequential.

It’s a larger concern to those buying the stock at any of these lofty levels.

It’s certainly an uncrowded thought and trade.

Should #AMZN‘s sport a market capitalisation which is $1 trillion less than today, I’m thinking of where the money goes to from the selling proceeds during its decline?

December 28, 2024

rob@karriasset.com.au

Intel CEO on the ropes

I think Intel CEO, Pat Gelsinger is on the ropes.

I’ve watched his various media interviews and listened to Intel quarterly earnings calls. Tone and posture has changed over the past 2 years and not for the better.

Coupled with Intel’s woeful stock performance since his appointment as CEO in February 2021, using the word’s “A.I.” and “Data Centres” can only do so much for the stock price.

Intel had 5 rounds of job cuts in 2023.

It just won $8.5 billion in U.S. Federal subsidies from the $52 billion CHIPS Act Congress passed last year and was promised to receive $11 billion in loans.

Regarding the funds available within the CHIPS Act, CEO Pat Gelsinger said he is counting on additional federal funding this year for defense-related semiconductor projects. And he said he hopes for a second CHIPS Act to reverse the long erosion of domestic technology manufacturing.

“We’ll need at least a CHIPS 2 to finish that job,” Gelsinger said.

https://www.govtech.com/workforce/intel-wins-8-5b-in-federal-chip-factory-subsidies

Its an early call, but a change in CEO will be good for the stock price.

by Rob Zdravevski

April 29, 2024

rob@karriasset.com.au

Screenshot

Perspective and Hypocrisy

What is the big deal with the Chinese government’s recent directives stymying technology or education firms?

During the 2010’s, the U.S. Department of Education either forced the closure or change of ownership, sued or ended accreditation or recognition of ‘education providers’ such as DeVry Education Group (now Adtalem Global Education), ITT Educational Services, Corinthian Colleges and Apollo Education (which was taken private at $10 per share, compared to its high of $89/share in 2009).

For example, then Californian attorney-general, Kamala Harris led the charge in suing Corinthian (leading to their demise in 2016 when she won her judgement) for predatory practices of mounting and leaving students in crippling debt……much like China’s concerns today.

In addition, didn’t the U.S. government force the break-up of AT&T and Microsoft?

And I wonder……aren’t Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple etc, some type of pseudo-government agencies ?

or at least, at their behest or influence?

Between all the congressional hearings and testimonies and the ‘cloud’ of anti-trust undertakings, a little perspective is required to the current Chinese news.

After all, it is not a far-fetched idea that Amazon is forced to ‘spin-off’ its AWS division.

The hypocrisy of western governments doesn’t seemed to be recognised by their own selves. They apply a host of restrictions, rules and bans too.

Perhaps China is entering its own Progressive Era and the U.S. may have its own 2.0 version?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-27/china-tech-crackdown-xi-charts-new-model-after-emulating-silicon-valley?sref=qLOW1ygh

July 30, 2021

by Rob Zdravevski

rob@karriasset.com.au