[tikkun]

Yes. I feel there should be some kind of anti-list of people who dumped SPACs and ICOs on the public.

I personally feel it was pretty gross behavior (in many, but not all, cases), and the people who did the egregious ones mostly knew at the time that they were doing a zero sum wealth transfer to themselves.

I personally avoid working with people who were involved in ICOs and SPACs where at the time of issuance a reasonable analysis could've shown that it was grossly overpriced to the public investors it was sold to (because in those cases, I believe that the issuer themselves should've known, and shouldn't have proceeded).

[sroussey]

I have the data. What would be a good UI for it?

For example: https://embarc.com/capital/leadership/chamath-palihapitiya

[tikkun]

A list, ranked by person/sponsor, ranked by total value reduction across all SPACs they did since some time point (merger? before then?), and normalized for multiple compression by looking at the ratio of some overall public tech index between that date and now (so that they're not overly penalized by multiple compression from higher interest rates).

Either presented as a list on a web page or a list in an infographic/image.

Overall show how much wealth public investors have lost in aggregate from investing with that person, normalized to general tech stock market declines. How much did they lose relative to the market. Their alpha, or negative alpha, I suppose.

[whimsicalism]

e: Removed, not sure I really agree with what I wrote on further reflection

[AJ007]

That just isn't a reasonable statement. No one forces someone to participate in a ponzi scheme.

The problem with SPACS is these were companies that did not go the IPO route because they would not pass SEC approval. Companies should go public even if they are unlikely to survive, but what we saw was mostly fraud. They received absurd valuations based on exaggerated growth claims combined with imaginary non-GAAP accounting -- things you can't do in an IPO.

Some of these participants will get in trouble. Enforcement is not immediate. a16z is probably going to end up in a lot of trouble over their cryptocurrency shenanigans. I think these guys pretty much burned their reputation in exchange for things like owning a $177m house in Malibu.

The consequences will be felt by everyone, not just the shitco and shitcoin hucksters.

[whimsicalism]

Fair enough, I didn't realize SPACs were effectively an end-run around SEC approval & GAAP accounting - and I worded too strongly for what was effectively an uninformed take.

[ibejoeb]

Burning rep for wealth is kinda an SV trope, though, right? It's "fuck you money."

[ftxbro]

> the people who did the egregious ones mostly knew at the time that they were doing a zero sum wealth transfer to themselves

sorry we can't all be dirt farmers in USA we got to get that bag or we die from medical cost

EDIT: everyone downvoting me knows it is true

[bee_rider]

Lots of people out there have decent middle class careers working in technical roles outside the FOMO-based-startup sector.