Initial Public Offering For A Global Firm

If the company did go public, its share price should be $384.37 for per share with the rapid growth scenario.

The stock market has increased from 1.896 in ’86 to 4.789 in ’95 thus creating an incentive for DLJ to offer an IPO. Strategy involved being the IPO allowed employees to exchange their compensation plans for shares and options in DLJ thus giving them an incentive to stay with the company. There were also many advantages and disadvantages related to DLJ going public. Advantages included DLJ increasing liquidity and allowing founders to harvest their wealth, permitting founders to diversify, facilitated raising new corporate cash, established value for the firm, and increasing the potential markets. Disadvantages included the cost of reporting, new disclosure requirements, self-dealings, a possibility of inactive markets reducing price, the firm losing some of its control, and a higher degree of investor relations had to be maintained.

How long they have been listed on the stock exchange and changes in share price over time

4) Do you think the total market value of Redhook, Pete’s and Boston Beer (at your proposed IPO price) makes sense, given the total size and profitability of the beer industry, and the craft-brewing segment? What profitability and growth assumptions are necessary to justify the total market value of these three craft brewers? (Hint: First determine the total market value of these three companies. Then figure out what the average after tax operating profit margin is for these three companies. Figure out what the value of these three companies would be if their after tax earnings continued forever, but did not grow at all. Then take the difference between their total Market Value and this (no growth) perpetuity value. This difference reflects the market value due to GROWTH. Try to figure out what growth rate in revenues is implied here by projecting total revenues for 10 years, and finding the after tax earnings for 10 years, and then discounting the after tax earnings at the cost of equity. Don't forget to calculate the terminal value (grow earnings at 4% after year 10.)

As said in class, it is important to make and keep good relationships with banks and bankers because they could make or break a company at some point

4) Do you think the total market value of Redhook, Pete’s and Boston Beer (at your proposed IPO price) makes sense, given the total size and profitability of the beer industry, and the craft-brewing segment? What profitability and growth assumptions are necessary to justify the total market value of these three craft brewers? (Hint: First determine the total market value of these three companies. Then figure out what the average after tax operating profit margin is for these three companies. Figure out what the value of these three companies would be if their after tax earnings continued forever, but did not grow at all. Then take the difference between their total Market Value and this (no growth) perpetuity value. This difference reflects the market value due to GROWTH. Try to figure out what growth rate in revenues is implied here by projecting total revenues for 10 years, and finding the after tax earnings for 10 years, and then discounting the after tax earnings at the cost of equity. Don't forget to calculate the terminal value (grow earnings at 4% after year 10.)

There are considerable advantages with obtaining equity through the IPO process. There are, however, some drawbacks that also need to be taken into consideration. Some of the advantages and disadvantages are:

Therefore, Wilcoxon tests are performed for the differences between the different sub- samples (Gill de Albornoz&Pope, 2004). If I compare survived IPOs and acquired IPOs, I can see the following results. Survived IPOs are, on average larger, have higher growth rates, have a higher level of intangibles, are more leveraged, have a higher market-to-book ratio, are less profitable and have a higher proportion of retail firms. However, as shown in Table 5.2, these differences are not significant. This can partially be explained by the small size of the different sub-samples. If I compare survived IPOs with failed IPOs, I can see that survived IPOs are, on average smaller, have a smaller growth rate, have a higher level of intangibles, are less leveraged, have a smaller market-to-book ratio, are less profitable and have a larger percentage of retail firms. Again, none of these differences are significant and the sub-samples might be too small to draw

The intrinsic value of Facebook stock was very difficult to find, since the company is relatively new and has been growing at an extreme rate. Based on the most recent sale of Facebook stock via a private transaction the per share price was $44 in March. However, based on the DCF analysis by professor Aswath Damodaran the intrinsic value of a single Facebook share would be $32.44. The problem is whenever using DCF analysis; the analysis is very sensitive to all assumptions uses, which were plenty in the case of Facebook. The price talk from underwriters varied immensely within the time from of February when the Red Herring was filed, all the way to May. At the very beginning, price talks were anywhere from $20 – mid $30’s. They were set to offer 337,415,352 shares. As the broader market continued in bullish trend and momentum for the Facebook IPO became greater. Price talks now shifted to $28-$35 range. Knowing that demand for the stock was said to be growing it was noted that many IPO are priced conservative to leave room for a pop on the first day of trading. On May 11 CNBC made a statement along the lines that demand was much greater than supply for the stock. Shortly after on May 14, the price talks had now moved to $34-$38 range and now offering 421,233,615 shares, the additional shares were all of insiders. This would set the companies valuation at

4. The article said that K12 was the closest comparable company to Rosetta Stone. Rosetta Stone is marketable to a larger consumer base than K12, so I think that it should be able to charge a higher IPO. The case said that book was more than 25 times oversubscribed during its road show which means Rosetta Stone could charge a much higher price. But these subscriptions are volatile and the economy is recovering, so a price too high could deter many investors. For my analysis I took the EBITDA margin for years 2006-2008 and found the average increase during that time to be 9.93%. I then took the estimated share value from 2008 and multiplied it by 1.0993 to factor in the average increase in share value. This resulted in a price of $19.22. Given this number I would increase the current range from $15-17 to $19-24. The reason for the increased range is because of the

(1) According to the case, global IPO activity during the first quarter of 2012 fell to $14.3 billion, which was dramatically down from $46.6 billion during the first quarter of 2011. In addition, we can see in Exhibit 5 that IPO activity in US have dropped sharply since the second quarter of 2011. Number of deals dropped from 383 in the second quarter of 2011 to 157 in the first quarter of 2012.

Companies can go through the whole process without an underwriter, but it is so complex and the experience is so specialized that it is hardly done. The complex market matters that are vague to most people are critical to the existence of underwriter, and it is in the best interest for a company to cash in on their expertise. The value brought upon by underwriter should be the guarantee that an IPO will be accurately managed and effectively marketed and supported, before and after going public.

That the share price has been so volatile is a measure of the risk in instigating an IPO in relatively uncharted waters.

As our point of view, though IPO will lead to short-term ups and downs of stock price, it will eventually reflect the real values of the company in the long run, consisting the stock price with its long-term performance.

1.One being an IPO offering, requiring the sale of less than 9% of the company. This offering will be for 3.5 million shares, with an expected sale price at between $14 and $18 per share.