[msoad]

An IPO will be longer. With the locked out period it will be more than a year

[makestuff]

Not necessarily if they do a direct listing.

[khazhoux]

A direct listing would be very unfair to the banks that have patiently waited years to take a multi-billion-dollar chunk of Stripe’s upside in exchange for setting the IPO price (integer between 20 and 50).

[htrp]

The level of shade is about as high as the expected ipo pop

[mercedsownboy]

Thank you for a great chuckle

[nerpderp82]

> unfair to the banks

[WXLCKNO]

I chuckled once more.

[yieldcrv]

but at least in an IPO the company would get a financing round, and the banks get to manipulate the market with a stabilizing bid indefinitely

direct listings completely rely on retail buyers for liquidity, and even in the frothiest markets that's not enough money in the face of all employees and the company dumping shares immediately

[chimeracoder]

> direct listings completely rely on retail buyers for liquidity, and even in the frothiest markets that's not enough money in the face of all employees and the company dumping shares immediately

IPOs typically have a lockup period, which means that employees will always be selling to retail buyers, whether on Day 1 with a direct listing or Day 90/180/etc. when the IPO lockup expires.

[yieldcrv]

for confidence games, an IPO is much better.

[chimeracoder]

> for confidence games, an IPO is much better.

Better for whom? And how?

It's not clear to me that it makes a difference for employees either way. It's not like the stock price on Day 90-180 are still thinking about what mechanism the company used to go public 3-6 months ago. At that point the stock price is mostly based on the two new 10-Qs that have been filed since then, plus additional current information like market conditions, etc.

[makestuff]

Those 3rd homes in Miami aren’t going to buy themselves.

[alasdair_]

> Those 3rd homes in Miami aren’t going to buy themselves.

They will if they come with a chatGPT4 assistant as standard.