SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (65354)12/31/2000 12:45:17 PM
From: Anthony@Pacific  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 122087
 
The year 2001 wil be the year of the Bankruptcy filing ...

Stay Tuned and grap some popcorn.



To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (65354)1/1/2001 4:27:27 PM
From: tom rusnak  Respond to of 122087
 
Also by Gretchen Morgenson of the NY Times on the same day:


THE FAME IS FLEETING AWARD
To Jeff Bezos, chairman of Amazon.com, for one of the fastest falls from grace in recent history. A year ago he was Time's man of the year; now he is facing irate shareholders whose stock has fallen 83 percent.

THE HOGWASH CAN SMELL SWEET AWARD
To Wall Street's Mr. Right, Ravi Suria, the convertible bond analyst at Lehman Brothers who halfway through the year, when Amazon's stock was still flying high at $42, had the temerity to question the company's prospects for profitability. While an Amazon spokesman called Mr. Suria's report "hogwash," investors who took his advice and avoided Amazon's securities saved themselves a lot of lost cabbage.

THE MUTUAL ADMIRATION SOCIETY AWARD
To Sanford I. Weil, chairman of the financial powerhouse Citigroup, and C. Michael Armstrong, chairman of the beleaguered AT&T, who prove that it always pays to have pals in high places. Mr. Armstrong sits on Citigroup's board, and Mr. Weil is a director of AT&T. So perhaps it was not all that surprising that Jack Grubman, the powerful telecommunications analyst at Salomon Smith Barney, a Citigroup subsidiary, turned positive on AT&T shares in November 1999. Or that five months later, Salomon was one of three Wall Street firms selected to help underwrite the telephone company's $10.6 billion wireless stock issue.

THE TIMING IS EVERYTHING AWARD
To Heidi Miller, the former chief financial officer of Citigroup, who left the old economy for the same job at Priceline.com. Unfortunately, her timing was off. Ms. Miller joined Priceline just before its fortunes — and share price — plummeted, leaving her barrels of stock options worthless. But don't cry for Ms. Miller. Priceline forgave a $3.3 million loan it had made to her, a move that, for its generosity of spirit, must have made Priceline shareholders feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Who cared that Priceline's generosity meant that it had to record a charge in the amount of the loan against its operations?

THE NOW YOU TELL ME AWARD
To Sara Farley, an analyst at PaineWebber, who on Sept. 28, after shares of Priceline had dropped from $104.25, to $10.75, put out a report maintaining her "buy" recommendation. But there was that additional little detail of her price target on the stock, which she lowered from $125, to $15. And no, a stock split was not involved.

THE THANKS, BUT NO THANKS AWARD
To the board of the Internet Capital Group, the formerly overvalued Internet incubator concern. On Nov. 24, the day after Thanksgiving, the board adopted a plan that it said would encourage potential acquirers to negotiate with it before trying a tender offer for the company. Shareholders may not have been too grateful for this, though, since at the time the stock had lost 96 percent of its value for the year. They might have welcomed any takeover as long as it was at a premium to the share price.

THE TIME TO SHARPEN YOUR TOOLS AWARD
To Henry Blodget, star Internet analyst at Merrill Lynch, who penned a report on Jan. 10 to defend the shares of Internet Capital, which had been labeled overvalued in an article in Barron's. "No news here," Mr. Blodget trilled in his report. Moreover, he said, "Valuation is often not a helpful tool in determining when to sell hypergrowth stocks." As it turned out, valuation was indeed the most helpful tool investors could have used. The stock was trading at $173.88 when Mr. Blodget wrote his report, a price the shares never saw again all year. Internet Capital now trades at $3.15 a share.

THE PATIENCE IS A VIRTUE AWARD
To Julian Robertson, hedge-fund manager and renowned value investor. He shut his investment firm in April, telling his investors that he could no longer make sense out of the manic market. After two decades of generating superlative returns, buying undervalued stocks and shorting expensive ones, Mr. Robertson began losing money in 1998 and continued through early 2000. Still, his timing was impeccable. His capitulation came just 14 trading days after the Nasdaq hit its peak of 5,048.62, proving that sometimes you have to be wrong to be right.

THE COMIC RELIEF AWARD
To lawyers at Websense, for having the humor to write the following disclaimer in the Internet company's initial public offering prospectus last April: "We have a history of losses and, because we expect our operating expenses to increase in the future, we may never become profitable." Alas, as everyone knows, love is blind. The stock, issued at $18 a share, closed its first day of trading at $47.75. (With thanks to James B. Stack of The InvesTech Research.) It closed on Friday at $14.50.

THE OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF BABES AWARD
To Jonathan Lebed, the New Jersey teenager who attended high school by day and, according to securities regulators, manipulated stocks by night on his computer. When he was apprehended for his scheme of promoting obscure stocks on the Internet that he had recently bought for himself, then selling the shares at higher prices to those who inexplicably acted on his anonymous tips, his response was, "Everybody does it." In a world where analysts put outlandish price targets on stocks and money managers regularly promote the stocks they hold on CNBC, truer words were never spoken.



To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (65354)1/1/2001 7:25:16 PM
From: Fast Eddie  Respond to of 122087
 
And these are the investment deals that Wall Street is so keen to underwrite.


Underwriters: Shaky at the Top

It was another banner year for Goldman, Sachs, the titan of the underwriting business. The company served as lead-manager for 60 IPOs, with a combined gross of more than $40 billion. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter didn't do too badly either, with 50 IPOs grossing $27 billion. And Credit Suisse First Boston had a nice year as well. Even though CSFB's deals grossed only $14 billion, there were 65 of them, more than any other bank.

All three of the giants of IPO underwriting were thus quite successful this year. They all easily surpassed their totals from 1999, and they did so in a year when the overall amount raised from IPOs was basically flat. Yes, it was another successful year in the wild world of investment banking.

Just make sure you don't look too closely.

The big three of the underwriting world may have raked in enormous underwriting fees, but at the end of the year, those deals don't look so great. Just as significant as the $40 billion raised by Goldman IPOs is the fact that, by the end of the year, those stocks had declined an average of 14% from their IPO prices. Morgan Stanley and CSFB had similarly disastrous figures.

Not All Their Fault

Of course, it's unfair to blame these underwriters too much for their IPOs' performances. The market was extremely difficult this year, and it was especially hard on the tech stocks that are the bread and butter of the IPO market. A 15% decline from IPO price is just about average for a company that debuted this year.

But even so, these percentages are somewhat surprising. The biggest investment banking houses – and it doesn't get any bigger than Goldman, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse – generally can take their pick of the most promising IPOs. They also tend to have the most powerful analysts, for whom a main job in modern-day Wall Street is to tout the stocks of companies that give their investment banks business. The biggest analysts generally have the most power to support the stock prices of the companies they cover.

Thus, it's a bit of an upset when smaller underwriters, like UBS Warburg and J.P. Morgan end the year with far better results than the biggest players. UBS Warburg had the best aftermarket performance of any major investment bank, with an average increase of 10% for its IPOs. J.P. Morgan also did quite well, with a 5% average gain.

Don't Count Out the Bull

The old standby Merrill Lynch also had a nice year. With more than $25 billion in proceeds, Merrill finished third in the underwriter sweepstakes. However, it far outshone its large rivals in aftermarket results. While the other $10 billion-plus players languished with IPO declines of 10% or more, Merrill managed to finish the year with its IPOs up an average of 1.76%.

A commendation should also go to Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown, the only other bank whose IPOs finished the year in positive territory. The bank lead-managed 32 deals for $8.5 billion in proceeds, with an average increase of 1.72%.

The successful investment banks (and success this year was defined by losing as little as possible) avoided the pitfalls of others by avoiding the most unstable sectors. Merrill Lynch, for example, underwrote relatively few dot-coms at the beginning of the year. The bank also managed a few rather unexpectedly strong offerings, from companies like Eden Bioscience (ticker: EDEN) and the recent Specialty Laboratories (ticker: SP).

The other top-ranked banks in aftermarket performance followed similar strategies. They managed to find hits like Krispy Kreme (ticker: KREM) and California Pizza Kitchen (ticker: CPKI, both underwritten by Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown), while more or less steering clear of the formerly high-flying Internet sector.

Implications of a Strange Year

It's somewhat unlikely that these topsy-turvy results will repeat themselves in the future. The biggest, most powerful banks still tend to get their pick of the IPO world – it just so happens that this year, many of the most beautiful princesses had turned into frogs by December. The smaller banks profited as much by their inability to get their hands on top dot-com IPOs as by any good deal-picking.

Still, it's an interesting change of pace to see the top names in tech banking upended at the end of 2000. If the tech market doesn't recover soon, who knows who will be at the top of next year's scorecard?