Newegg.com withdraws IPO | Hacker News Reader

Newegg.com withdraws IPO

renaissancecapital.com

39 pointsnathanlrivera38 comments

I wonder what that was about.

They are only second to Amazon in customer service quality IMHO.

And with quicker shipping. If Amazon and Newegg have something for the same price, or the difference is just a few dollars, I go with Newegg every time.

That was the case, before Amazon Prime.

Shoprunner.com evens the playing field for Newegg.

Shoprunner looks interesting. Have you actually used it? I saw that Domino's Pizza supposedly offers free delivery, but I couldn't find any details.

I just signed up a few days ago. Worked as advertised.

And it does show up on the Domino's order page, but I ended up getting carryout anyway.

I don't have an edu address. I don't have to pay an annual fee to get fast service from Newegg.

I spent much of last weekend pricing out a custom build workstation and was having trouble finding a source other than newegg. Amazon is a disorganized mess when it comes to fulfilling very specific hardware needs. TigerDirect is just skeezy. Seems like they should have it made.

I completely agree. I don't buy parts from anywhere but Newegg unless I absolutely have to.

And I just signed up for Shoprunner.com since Newegg joined them. $79/year for 2 day shipping on most everything Newegg carries. Where's your Amazon Prime now?

it's the same cost?

or if you have an EDU email address it can be free

I buy all my components from Tiger Direct, and have had very good luck. I order stuff regular shipping, and it is here the next day.

Here is the EDGAR filing: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341704/0001193125111...

Relevant text:

"At this time the Company has determined not to proceed with the initial public offering contemplated by the Registration Statement. The Registration Statement has not been declared effective by the Commission and the Company hereby confirms that no securities were sold in connection with the offering described in the Registration Statement. Therefore, withdrawal of the Registration Statement is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors, as contemplated by paragraph (a) of Rule 477."

How much of a competitive disadvantage are they at relative to Amazon due to the sales tax situation?

Speaking of which, how many people actually report and pay the use taxes on purchases from Amazon?...

Illinois just added a new line to its income tax form in which it is implied "ok, you bought stuff online and didn't keep track of it because you never wanted to pay this stupid tax anyway. So here, just look up your base income on this five-line table and that's what we'll call your use tax for the year."

To my knowledge, California already does this, as well as a few other states. This leads me to believe that the ongoing battle over Internet sales tax may have found a compromise at this point in flat-fee use taxes.

I actually managed to do my taxes early this year, but I think I remember Michigan giving the option of stating how much you owe, or if you're not sure paying $50. I'm sure a lot of people just put in $0 for how much they owe. I figured it was worth $50 to get rid of the 1 in a million chance that lying came back to bite me in the ass.

A flat use tax is the equivalent of no use tax at all in terms of purchase incentives.

How does compromise address the competitive discrepancies?

At least in Illinois' case, the competitive discrepancies were second to keeping the state government running.

They're trying to avoid getting screwed like Linkedin.

Have you a link to a story about this? I'd not heard anything about LinkedIn's IPO going sour. I googled but nothing except positive stories were returned.

There's a reason they say sell in May. A lot of people think in June LinkedIn is going to take a beating. But who knows really, a lot of the time it is just a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Fundamentals be damned?

Trade like a technician.

See above: LNKD's p/e ratio is 1318 GOOG's p/e ratio is 20

LinkedIn's fundamentals are damning.

He's saying the stock doubled in its first day of trading. Meaning the shares were offered at a price. The company sold shares at that price. The same day the value of those shares doubled. So tr market is saying the shares are worth double of the IPO (initial public offering) price.

This behavior was common during the dot com bubble. IPOs doubled in price, everyone was happy. It's totally unrealistic.

Anyone who buys LinkedIn is retarded. Serious people that trade the market wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. Sure you can trade this crap and make fist fulls of money in the short term. The venture capitalists got paid. Do not own this stock.

> This behavior was common during the dot com bubble. IPOs doubled in price, everyone was happy. It's totally unrealistic.

Google more than tripled in the first two months that followed its IPO and it's been trading steadily at ~$550 (IPO: $87) for several years.

> Anyone who buys LinkedIn is retarded.

Obvious shorter is obvious.

LNKD's p/e ratio is 1318 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=LNKD&ql=0

GOOG's p/e ratio is 20 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=GOOG&ql=0

Do not construed this as an opportunistic swing at LinkedIn to make money. This is basic market fact. Do you know of a stock that trades with a p/e of 1,300?

How can you make such an extraordinary claim that my analysis had ulterior motives when anyone with any knowledge of the market and the metrics of valuing stocks would know for sure that LinkedIn was overpriced not by magnitudes of 2 or 10 but by a magnitude of 100.

The stock shouldn't be trading much more than 8. But the market will remain irrational longer than the individual solvent.

> LNKD's p/e ratio is 1318 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=LNKD&ql=0 GOOG's p/e ratio is 20 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=GOOG&ql=0

Are you seriously comparing the P/E of a company that's been public for four days with one that's been public for seven years?

Because a company that made $12m last year should have a market cap of $8.5B? It's unrealistic to think otherwise? And anyone who does so is obviously trying to affect its share price ... via posts to a low-volume Internet message board?

I'm not sure I follow your logic here.

This is ridiculous. LinkedIn had benefited from computer algorithmic trading that jacked it's price to extraordinarily urealistic price to earnings ratios. p/e is a metric in which stocks are valued. How much the company is worth divided by the yearly earnings.

To say LinkedIn got screwed is to say the dot coms got screwed in 2000. Guess what? The only people that got screwed were the share holders. LinkedIn should be jumping for joy that their peice of shit company is worth anywhere near 8 billion dollars. I just feel bad for the stupid shareholders when their shares become worthless.

That was a short bubble.

Hope it has nothing to do with the plaintext password storage revelation , which came last week

Was it much of a story outside of tech circles? i.e. do you think the average investor would have heard about it?

It's an interesting theory anyway. I suspect as someone else has posted that it's related to the way the LinkedIn IPO went.

Unless I'm missing something, the CS Rep giving him his password in clear text does not necessarily mean it was stored in clear text.

Newegg should not be able to determine what his password is. 2-way encryption is less bad than truly storing it in cleartext, but 1-way encryption is the only acceptable way to store a password unless there's some very compelling reason that you need to be able to decrypt it. (eg. I used 2-way encryption to store people's Twitter passwords before OAuth because I needed to be able to tell Twitter their passwords, so 1-way wouldn't work.)

If you can get the cleartext of the password without any information outside of what lives on Newegg's servers, then the password is effectively stored in cleartext.

Doubtful. It is more likely they don't feel they're ready to strategically invest the capital (going IPO is to gain capital for the company mainly).

Wasn't the plan for them to expand their business in China with the IPO?

Maybe they fear a hostile takeover by AMZN?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com