[ericmay]

> The flaw in your thinking is assuming it's actually worth the IPO price.

Then don't buy it at the IPO price? The bullshit artist will have to lower their price until there are takers in the market.

> If I'm a bullshit artist, $100 is great, $50 is good, and I'm just trying to avoid the $0 scenario.

They're not bullshit artists, they're greedy. If you think you're pulling one over on someone $100 is great but $200 is better - might as well see if you can get $200. Since we're just making up random people and motivations.

[ceejayoz]

> Then don't buy it at the IPO price?

I think you're getting lost here.

If I invested $0.50/share, I know my company is worth realistically $10/share, and I can convince you to buy at $100/share, and it plunges to $50/share before I can offload, I am still a pretty happy camper.

Retail investors are the marks, not the scammer here.

> They're not bullshit artists, they're greedy.

Those aren't mutually exclusive.

Musk is both, for instance.

[ericmay]

I wrote in another post which I think fits nicely here: You are ignoring things like lockup periods, vesting schedules, and other general machinery that specifically exist to prevent day 1 or short-term dumps of shares. It's not in the interest of the company that is IPOing or the bank - how can the investment bank go to investors and market securities and then on Day 1 those securities (because it's a pump and dump remember?) drop by 10% - 20% - 30% or more. That's bad business and investors will leave investment firms that did that.

> Retail investors are the marks, not the scammer here.

Retail investors who aren't sophisticated enough to do analysis and evaluate equities shouldn't buy them less they potentially lose (or make) money. You're inventing a scam and scammers where none exist here. Uninformed retail investors, and who knows how much money they even have, should be buying index funds which is what is advised by investment firms, CFPs, and more.

[ceejayoz]

> You are ignoring things like lockup periods, vesting schedules, and other general machinery that specifically exist to prevent day 1 or short-term dumps of shares.

No, I am not. That’s the “it plunges to $50/share before I can offload” period.

[ericmay]

You're just making stuff up.

Even in this contrived scenario, a stock plunging to 50% of its IPO price doesn't indicate much. It can still be a good investment. Stocks are punished for non-material things all the time.

Even when these mythical scammers that you've completely made up decide to sell, they need willing market buyers. If those market buyers are sophisticated investors then who cares if they lose money - you know the risks.

If they're retail investors then they shouldn't be buying individual stocks in the first place without conducting proper research which would tell them the stock is a good or bad investment based on their own criteria. As I've already mentioned, the default advice and what is common in the industry is to purchase index funds or target date retirement funds. If you go off and buy some stock at IPO you should have done your research, or you can live and die by the results of your investment. Sometimes you even make money.

I'm just not going to accept you or anyone else just making stuff up like this when I see it, calling things pump-and-dumps, and then walking away as though you have some fait accompli and it's all rigged and all the scammers are just scamming and screwing you. There are guardrails, regulations, rules, and standard advice. If you go buy some high-flying IPO and you lose money that is your fault. Learn to be responsible for yourself and stop projecting your own failure and cynicism on others. Cynicism is the refuge of the most foolish of people.