Please just remember that you should always read the entire prospectus, verbatim from the SEC, if you want to really understand what's going on. Not just someone else's analysis, and definitely not the "investor summary" or God forbid the slide deck prepared by the securities seller (the company). Bottom-to-top reading is a useful strategy because there's usually some bad and relevant stuff hidden close to the end.
It's an adversarial game where you (the buyer) want to pay as little as possible, the company (the seller) wants as much as possible, and the SEC (the regulator) is the neutral arbiter of information. Any third party's intention is unknown unless they publish their full portfolio.
Well, we can only have one link at the top of any given submission, and it is best not to have two threads on the same topic, so the question remains which link should win?
The SEC link should win and people can offer compelling analysis / summary links in the comments. The SEC filing is the official resource and will be a superset of what's discussed / focused on in any given 3rd party commentary
>, and it is best not to have two threads on the same topic, so the question remains which link should win?
I think the analysis by Meritech Capital should win because inside that article, the first sentence already has a direct link to the official SEC S-1 anyway.
For HN audience, it's easier to read the much shorter (even if flawed) Meritech Capital blog post and comment on that -- rather than read then entire S-1 prospectus (~100,000 words!). Those that want to dive into the lengthy S-1 can still do so; the link is conveniently in the first sentence.