IPO Slowdown Leads NEA to Sell $1B Worth of Startup Stakes
wsj.com
wsj.com
Seems this startup bull cycle has been driven by M&A where the late 1990s was driven by retail investors. However the tech acquirers seemed to have slowed down since 2010-2014 while biotech acquirers have been doing a steady number of billion dollar plus buyouts
"Two-thirds of the 21 tech IPOs in the past year are below their issue price, with shares down an average of about 20 percent through Friday. Leading the wipe out are online financing platforms Qudian Inc. and PPDai Group Inc., which plummeted 55 percent and 48 percent respectively, while search engine Sogou Inc. has tanked 27 percent."
"The extraordinary surge in private valuations that has seen China sprout 164 companies worth at least $1 billion now presents a challenge in public markets."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-14/strugglin...
If you only follow the bay area tech industry, you'd be excused for believing that this bubble isn't structural -- that it's just the inevitable consequence of the maturing role of the internet and technology in our daily lives. But assets everywhere are inflated in value. From Tesla shares to vacation homes to startup stock to blockchain tulips, the global pool of money has been desperately chasing speculative returns for years, and that process is finally beginning to unwind.
The total number of U.S. exchange-listed companies peaked near 8,800 in 1997 and has since sunk to 4,900 as of year-end 2012, according to data furnished by Strategas Group.
https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/michael-santoli/the-stock-ma...
Stocks are in for a rough ride, but if you're into a diversified market for the long term, probably as good as ever.
> Suggests decentralized alternative.
> Gets downvoted into oblivion
Look crypto isn't perfect, and it's highly volatile, so maybe putting all your life savings into bitcoin isn't the best idea, but knee jerk reactions like this don't help with substantive discussion.
It doesn't matter how underwater your mortgage is unless you need to sell out of it. If you don't think you're going to live somewhere for 10+ years, or if it's more expensive to buy then rent on your preferred timescale, then don't get a mortgage.
Most mortgages written in the last 5 years - that is, the ones which might be underwater - are fixed rate and have meaningful down payments.
Even if unemployment rises[1], as long as homeowners still have the same monthly payments, and have a meaningful down payment, they’d stay in their homes as long as possible.
In cities where appreciation has been strong, I think the likely outcome is a small (5-15%) decline over a few years, then flat appreciation (ie, a decline in real dollars) for a few more years, and relatively few sales because most folks would stay rather than sell while underwater. This may decrease geographic mobility. Basically, when rates rise closer to historical norms, 5 years of appreciation is already priced in and anyone who doesn’t need to move doesn’t move.
As with most assets, don’t put yourself in a position where you absolutely need to sell.
[1] If mortgage rates go up significantly, employment is still probably relatively low or the Federal Reserve would loosen its monetary policy and that would affect the mortgage market. I’m ignoring the wildcard case where the Fed’s monetary policy moves no longer have any impact.