Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Investments’ Category

Here is a story I picked up at DowJones VentureSource;

“Dow Jones VentureSource is reporting today that Q2 of this year was “one of the worst” ever for venture capital backed firms, in terms of liquidity, since early 2003. According to Dow Jones, there was only $2.8 billion in exits for the quarter, including both mergers and acquisitions and IPOs, down 57% from last year’s numbers. Dow Jones said there was $2.57 billion in mergers and acquisitions of 67 companies in Q2, down from $6.48B and 89 transactions in Q2 of 2008. The three venture-backed IPOs on the market raised $232M. In terms of valuation, VentureSource reported the median amount paid for a venture-backed company in Q2 was almost $22M, down from $41M from the comparable period in 2008″


Read Full Post »

Good news are starting to come across from market indicators. The economy is slowly starting to turn its heavy pessimism to a optimistic, normal belief of opportunity. Looking at these indicators on IPO filings, there are plenaty of opportunities on the horizon.

Here ar some good news posted by Wall Street Journal.

“The pace of new stock offerings perked up this spring after a cold winter, but the market for new issues still has a long way to go before a real recovery.

The story was the same in every corner of the world. At best, there was a pickup in issuance in the second quarter of 2009 from the first quarter, but there was nowhere near the levels of a year earlier.

World-wide, 78 companies raised $10.6 billion in initial public offerings of stock in the second quarter, up from 54 deals that raised just $1.3 billion in the first three months of 2009, according to data from Dealogic, which tracks new issues. But in the second quarter of 2008, 243 new public companies sold $33.4 billion of shares, by Dealogic’s count. All data exclude real-estate investment trusts and empty shell companies known as special-purpose acquisition companies, or SPACs.

If comparisons with last year aren’t sobering enough, consider this: In the second quarter of 2007, 469 companies raised a total of $88.2 billion — six times the number and more than eight times the dollar volume of the latest three months.

“In terms of volume of issuance, let’s face it, we’re still in the very early innings of recovery,” says Kevin Willsey, head of equity capital markets for the Americas at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

U.S. pricings in the latest quarter totaled 10, valued at $1.3 billion, compared with 11 deals that raised $4.2 billion in the 2008 period. Latin America and India each had one IPO for the second quarter, while Russia and Australia had none.

The largest offering in the world during the second quarter was the $4.27 billion raised on the Bovespa stock exchange by VisaNet, the Brazilian affiliate of credit-card network Visa Inc.

China had 13 IPOs in the second quarter that raised a combined $2.9 billion, compared with 20 that raised $2.3 billion a year ago; Europe had 10 deals totaling just $209 million, compared with 79 that raised $12.1 billion.

Still, bankers appear more optimistic now about the IPO market than at any time since last fall, with many saying there could be a stronger pickup in issuance in the second part of this year.

U.S. IPOs have performed well on their debuts this year. The May offering of OpenTable Inc. generated the best first-day performance since late 2007, before the stock-market meltdown. The company, which raised $60 million in its offering, rose 59% on its first day of trading.

The outlook for the IPO market depends on whether there are nasty surprises in second-quarter earnings reports, which will start arriving by the middle of this month, stable prices in the broader stock market and continued hopes for economic recovery.”

In this articl, Lynn cowan closes by saying:

“More deals later in the year would play into historical buying patterns by large institutions such as mutual funds and hedge funds, says Joe Castle, head of U.S. equities syndicate at Barclays Capital. “Fall is a popular time to buy IPOs,” he says, “because it positions portfolios with high-growth companies for the following calendar year and boosts performance for the current year if they trade well initially.”

Despite glimmers of hope in some areas of the world, like the U.S., bankers and investors alike are aware things could suddenly take a turn for the worse.

“We don’t see firms storming the gates to launch into the IPO market right now,” says David DiPietro, president of boutique investment bank Signal Hill in Baltimore. “We probably need to see another quarter of solid earnings from a broad base of companies.”

To read the full article, click here.

Read Full Post »

As Facebook secured some investments earlier this year, and invested it towards international growth, the latest news spark renewed IPO rumors.

Of course, no one knows, but the hiring of a CFO from a larger corporation is nothing you do unless you have greater plans. First and foremost, it costs you a bunch of money, secondly, the demands this person has on you by his experience will force the structure needed upon you.

The biggest challenge remains though – to create profitability.

Here is a quoted article from BusinessWeek.

“In April, when Facebook announced the departure of Chief Financial Officer Gideon Yu, the social network said it would look for a replacement “with public company experience.” Facebook found what it was seeking in David Ebersman, a 15-year veteran of biotech pioneer Genentech (DNA).

“David [Ebersman] worked at one of the most innovative and respected [companies] in the world, so he brings a lot to the table when it comes to our efforts to build a lasting, important company,” Facebook spokesman Larry Yu says of the appointment, announced on June 29.

Ebersman’s appointment keeps alive speculation over whether and how soon the world’s biggest social network is headed for an initial public share sale. “We have no plans to go public,” says spokesman Larry Yu. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was quoted in May saying an IPO remains “a few years out.”

Ebersman, 38, served as Genentech’s CFO for the four years leading up to its $46.8 billion sale to drug giant Roche Holding (ROG) in May. In Facebook’s press release, CEO Mark Zuckerberg noted that under Ebersman, Genentech’s revenue tripled. Zuckerberg envisions high growth for his company as well, saying sales will rise 70% this year. (eMarketer has projected that Facebook’s revenue will grow 20% this year, to $300 million.)”

Read the full article here.

Read Full Post »

Here is an article I found at cleantech.

“San Francisco, Calif.-based CMEA Capital is on the hunt for the best and brightest cleantech investments. But if the investors can’t find what they are looking for, founder and Managing Director Tom Baruch told the Cleantech Group they’ll create their own company.

The venture capital firm usually invests anywhere from $10 million to $15 million per company, over the life of its involvement with the company, he said. And these days, renewable fuels and chemicals from cellulosic precursors as well as algae are catching the attention of CMEA investors. Baruch said they are working on a stealth project in collaboration with a university in San Diego to genetically modify algae to produce chemicals.

“We’re working to see if we can build our own company,” he said. “We’re shopping for the right technologies and supporting some small research projects.”

CMEA has also invested about $15 million to date in Codexis, which makes producing biofuels, pharmaceuticals and industrial products faster through its next-generation biocatalytic chemical manufacturing processes. CMEA was involved in spinning Codexis out of Redwood City, Calif.-based biotech company Maxygen (Nasdaq:MAXY).

Codexis, which filed its S-1 in 2008 (see Codexis files for $100M IPO) and then pulled it due to market conditions (see Codexis withdraws IPO), has attracted significant private equity investment with IPO plans on the horizon again come 2010.

In March, global energy giant Royal Dutch Shell NYSE:(RDS.A) and Codexis expanded an agreement to develop better biocatalysts, with Shell increasing its equity stake in Codexis. The companies first announced the partnership in 2006 to investigate other biofuels, researching new enzymes to convert biomass directly into components similar to gasoline and diesel, with Shell taking a stake in the company in 2007 (see Shell partners with Codexis for next generation biofuel research and Shell, Codexis in biofuels agreement).

Baruch said he expects Codexis to turn a profit by the end of this year.

“We want to be involved in companies that are truly transformative—that change the way people do things and think about things, that have cost and performance characteristics that are a leap apart from what’s currently available,” he said.  “And frankly, if it’s not transformative I don’t want to do it.”

To read the full article, click here.

Read Full Post »

Here is a excellent analysis from Willem Buiter´s blog at FT.com.

“The too big to fail problem has been central to the degeneration and corruption of the financial system in the north Atlantic region over the past two decades. The ‘too large to fail’ category is sometimes extended to become the ‘too big to fail’, ‘too interconnected to fail’, ‘too complex to fail’ and ‘too international’ to fail problem, but the real issue is size.  The real issue is size.  Even if a financial business is highly interconnected, that is, if its total exposure to the rest of the world and the exposure of the rest of the world to the financial entity are complex and far-reaching, it can still be allowed to fail if the total amounts involved are small.  A complex but small business is no threat to systemic stability; neither is a highly international but small business.  Size is the core of the problem; the other dimensions (interconnectedness, complexity and international linkages) only matter (and indeed worsen the instability problem) if the institution in question is big.  So how do we prevent banks and other financial businesses from becoming too large to fail?”

Mr Buiter suggests a series of meassures in his article, to read the analogy, please see link below.

  • Become too big to save
  • Restore narrow banking or public utility banking
  • Create mono-product central counterparties and providers of custodial services, central wholesale and securities payment, clearing and settlement platforms
  • Keep a lid on the size of investment banks
  • Tax bank size
  • Use competition policy
  • Restrict limited liability to prevent excessive risk taking and reduce the size of banks
  • Create effective special resolution mechanisms for all systemically important financial institutions

He concludes:

“In banking and most highly leveraged finance, size is a social bad.  Fortunately, there is quite a list of effective instruments for cutting leveraged finance down to size.

  • Legally and institutionally, unbundle narrow banking and investment banking (Glass Steagall-on-steroids).
  • Legally and institutionally prevent all banks (narrow banks and investment banks) from engaging in activities that present manifest potential conflicts of interest. This means no more universal banks and similar financial supermarkets.
  • Limit the size of all banks by making regulatory capital ratios an increasing function of bank size.
  • Enforce competition policy aggressively in the banking sector, by breaking up banks if necessary.
  • Require any remaining systemically important banks to produce a detailed annual bankruptcy contingency plan.
  • Only permit limited liability for narrow banks/public utility banks.
  • Create a highly efficient special resolution regime for all systemically important financial institutions. This SRR will permit an omnipotent Conservator/Administrator to financially restructure the failing institutions (by writing down the claims of the unsecured creditors or mandatorily converting them into equity), without interfering materially with new lending, investment and funding operations.

The Geithner plan for restructuring US regulation is silent on the too big to fail problem.  That alone is sufficient to ensure that it will fail to result in a more stable and safer US banking and financial system.

In the UK, the otherwise enlightened head of the FSA, Adair Turner, does not see a problem with banks of huge size and with a staggering range of unrelated or conflicted activities.  Of all the parties that matter, only the Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, is clear that ‘too big to fail’ is at the heart of the financial crisis we are trying to exit and will be at the heart of the next financial crisis that we are preparing so assiduously.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling takes the cake in the bigger is better stakes.  He appointed “Win” Bischoff, the former chairman of Citigroup (appointed interim CEO for Citigroup in December 2007 after Chuck Prince bit the dust), to co-chair the writing of a report on UK international financial services – the future, published on May 7, 2009.  That’s rather like asking the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to write a report on who won the Iranian presidential election.  It really is the most ridiculous appointment since Caligula appointed his favourite horse a consul.  You will not be surprised to hear that the report does not consider the size of UK banks to be excessive.

International cooperation is necessary if we are to solve the too big to fail problem.  I am not holding my breath.”

To read the full article, click here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »