Hacker News Reader

Comment by treis | Hacker News Reader

>About time a profitless company gets what it deserves.

Yes, a 63 billion dollar market cap is sure showing them!

>Tech companies have seemed to survive indefinitely bleeding VC money.

That's somewhat of the issue here. The outcome for VCs at this price is still somewhere between massive return and breaking even. It's the public at large that bought into the IPO via retirement funds that is hurting the most.

View on HN

I highly doubt in the few days Uber has been on the market the "public at large" has purchased any significant share of Uber using their pension accounts. It's not in an indices so they're certainly not exposed through that.

I said the public at large via retirement funds. Teachers get less because CalSTRS lost money* either via direct purchase or through asset managers.

* Just an example I don't know if they bought into the IPO or not.

Large index weighted funds don't buy into IPOs until significantly after the fact.

Really? For the CalSTRS example, they issued PR that they bought into the FB IPO, and had also bought into pre-IPO private companies.

eg:

> CalSTRS has owned shares in Facebook, Inc. since its initial public offering in 2012, as well as through privately held assets prior to the IPO.

https://www.calstrs.com/statement/calstrs-ongoing-engagement...

Something run by California was mismanaged you say? I'm terribly shocked

Market caps are horribly inflated/underinflated and not a accurate representation of the companies finances and viability due to it being based on total share price. Looking at their equity is. It's also important to view its profit vs. expense ratio because that tells you what the company is doing with its money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com