"Calif.-founded EV maker Canoo, once worth $2.4 billion, goes belly-up after moving to Texas"
Full title. Another L for the SPAC era.
Full title. Another L for the SPAC era.
I get that it is the original title, but even the article itself points out that the company was in dire straits well before the move.
The move (and forced relocation of employees) was likely a way to force attrition, since it was followed fairly quickly with layoffs elsewhere.
If anything, including mention of the move in the title just muddles the readers' expectations of the article, IMHO, and the article would be better off without it.
You might expand the full title to "After move interpreted by experts as likely a way to force attrition" to explain the relevance :)
Does anyone know of a site that tracks the outcome of SPAC mergers? I found some articles but most of them are pretty old. Curious if there have been any successes.
It feels like so much "financial innovation" of the past 30 years in that it was just a way for rich people to get even richer and, as you say, leave the dumb money as bag holders.
If someone is the type who willingly hand over their money knowing what a SPAC is and does, he’s a contrarian who smarter than everyone else, an idiot, or someone who thinks he can make a quick buck by letting the idiot hold the bag at the end — but really the latter two end up being the same.
The only companies on this list with stock prices over the original $10 SPAC price are:
- Oklo (mini nuclear reactors)
- DraftKings (gambling)
- Hims & Hers (wellness telehealth)
- Grindr (gay hookup app)
The majority of companies have lost 80-95% of their original value. Many SPACs have done a big reverse split, so their price appears to be over $10 but the original price would have been in the hundreds.