Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

truthlesshunter t1_izdsl6o wrote

I don't know how I forgot this, but Visa only going public in 2008 is crazy.

744

HG_Sheldor t1_izdxnr2 wrote

Surprised that many people invest in Anal Spa.

84

usmcplz t1_ize5jpa wrote

Replying to RutherfordBHays (#884,869)

Yeah that makes sense. I didn't think about the bailout and how that would affect their public listing. I was just thinking about the historic nature of the company in general.

23

Muscled_Daddy t1_izecbfc wrote

Can we redo this but adjusted for inflation? That would be more interesting, I feel.

19

sparklybeast t1_izetea3 wrote

I have never heard of an IPO. I Googled and I'm still none the wiser lol.

15

CUJO-31 t1_izeuhgp wrote

Replying to sparklybeast (#886,285)

Initial public offering, when a company goes from private to public by issuing stocks.

You create a company which you own a 100% of, but you need to raise more money. You have three primary options.

1- get a loan 2- sell a company to a private investor for a portion of your company. 3- chop up your ownership into tiny bits and sell a portion of it to the public via a stock exchange, anyone can buy and sell it. The first time it hits the market is called IPO.

36

CUJO-31 t1_izeui16 wrote

Replying to sparklybeast (#886,285)

Initial public offering, when a company goes from private to public by issuing stocks.

You create a company which you own a 100% of, but you need to raise more money. You have three primary options.

1- get a loan

2- sell a portion of your company to a private investor.

3- chop up your ownership into tiny bits and sell all or a portion of it to the public via a stock exchange, anyone can buy and sell it. The first time it hits the market is called IPO.

11

RebelLemurs t1_izeui61 wrote

I'm assuming this is investment raised at IPO, not market cap at IPO. There's a big difference between the two, and people are generally more familiar with the latter.

50

ValyrianJedi t1_izf10r2 wrote

It seems like it would be useful to include acquisitions too, since that's the other side of the same coin and those numbers can be absolutely massive too...

I have a consulting firm that finds VC and angel investment for startups, mostly tech and energy, and around a decade ago was working for a finance firm doing similar work... A decade ago when you asked "what is your 'everything worked out perfectly' hope for where this company will be in 5-10 years" you would almost always get "successful IPO". These days when I ask the same question I get a lot more "get bought by titan of the industry company X or Y". Not like nobody wants IPOs anymore by any means, but a lot of people would prefer to sell to Google or Tesla or someone with a favorable deal and an honorary seat at the table afterwards instead of going public.

1

lukehawksbee t1_izf16d4 wrote

Note that this doesn't reflect the value of the business but only the portion of the business that was floated on the stock market. For instance Aramco only sold 1.5% of the business via their IPO, whereas I think GM sold more like 28% in their 2010 IPO?

3

TheDoktorIsIn t1_izf34f5 wrote

I explicitly remember Facebook going public in 2012 and saying "who on earth is buying stock in a myspace knockoff? This thing is going to die just as fast as the other 10" and this is why I'm not a market predictor.

14

Salty_Paroxysm t1_izf3th2 wrote

Wow, apparently Aramco's IPO was for roughly 1.5% of the company's total value (according to investopedia).

1

strangway t1_izfg2pz wrote

Alibaba sells garbage products for cheap prices and uses every last bit of information about you to spam your phone and email. I’m still getting spam calls in Chinese 5 years after trying out their service. Never bought a thing from them.

0

TonyTheEvil t1_izfiouu wrote

Replying to Salty_Paroxysm (#886,910)

I'm confused about that. Looking at yahoo finance the difference between their IPO and current price is only ~1.59% as of writing. Google Finance says it's actually down ~6%. What should I be looking at?

1

TankSparkle t1_izfpdx6 wrote

and they are all way less than what Elon Musk paid for Twitter

1

lawschoolquestion34 t1_izfqmjc wrote

Replying to finite2 (#887,798)

Those rights aren’t typical for the Fortune 500. Usually found in public former startups like Facebook with powerful founders or investors-turned-owners. Certain rights associated with preferred stock etc. certainly exists but what you’ll see with voting power at Facebook is far and away the exception to the rule.

20

RunningJay t1_izfx7nc wrote

Replying to RebelLemurs (#886,359)

Yeah, the heading makes no sense.

​

It is investment raised, which is a weird metric; as you say, the market cap is a much more well-known and probably more interesting metric.

13

Wizard01475 t1_izfzddw wrote

They should be adjusted for inflation

1

spongesking t1_izg7mmp wrote

Replying to drunkenviking (#886,765)

Not true. Stocks are divided into preferred and common stocks. The difference is that preferred stocks don't have voting rights; common stocks do.

I know the US government bought preferred stocks, but don't know how much. So, this could imply the US government wasn't the "true main shareholders".

−7

ProbablyCranky t1_izgaxyy wrote

I don't really understand why the creator of this wouldn't include the meaning of IPO somewhere.

1

[deleted] t1_izgweou wrote

Are there mega companies that would be #1 if they IPOd?

1

space-cyborg t1_izgyuv6 wrote

The three-dimensional bars are terrible. They add nothing to the visualization, and they make the chart harder to read. For example, you can't tell visually that the $18.1B and $17.9B numbers are different, whereas if the bars had flat tops, you could.

The colors also add nothing, since we don't need or have a legend. Color could be better used for a different variable of interest here (like a scale for year of the IPO, or to categorize countries or industries).

It makes no sense to me to have the company name on the bar and the logo above. Put the logos on the bar if you must have them. The company names are also inaccurate: ICBC stands for Industrial and Commercial Bank of China; its name is not "ICBC Bank". NTT should be NTT Docomo. SoftBank is, bizarrely, SoftBank Group Corp. It may seem like nitpicking, but it's worth getting company names right. If that creates a problem with disambiguating organizations with similar names, that problem has to be solved in another way.

The comparison of data across 24 years (1988 - 2022) with no inflation adjustment makes the chart difficult to interpret.

1

inhocfaf t1_izh4hqs wrote

Replying to CUJO-31 (#886,356)

>You create a company which you own a 100% of, but you need to raise more money.

Highly unlikely. Probably do many rounds of unregistered exempt offerings well before an IPO.

1

r4wbeef t1_izh7d1h wrote

This is missing lots of big tech companies. For example Airbnb IPO'ed for 100B.

1

rabbibert t1_izhc3tk wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#890,003)

That would be Aramco. That IPO was a tiny fraction of that company. Given that it’s value is basically the value of all the oil in Saudi Arabia, that company is worth trillions.

1

2FANeedsRecoveryMode t1_izhua2m wrote

i remember aramco executives boasting about how aramco was easily top 5 in the world before it went public

1

criminalsunrise t1_izi9m26 wrote

Replying to RebelLemurs (#886,359)

I was going to query this. Arm is looking at an IPO at some point over the next year, and according to this it’d easily beat all of these … but then I realised that this can’t be market cap.

1

EspressoVagabond t1_izidimm wrote

Replying to r4wbeef (#890,508)

The $100B isn't actually using the same metric as the chart though. $100B is the total valuation of the company on the public market, but they "only" raised $3B from the IPO so it wouldn't make this list. These lists usually look at how much cash the company raised from the IPO.

1