Latest / How Canadian Markets Work / The IPO Explained: Who Gets Rich Before You Can Buy? | Canadian Investing

Transcript

The IPO Explained: Who Gets Rich Before You Can Buy? | Canadian Investing · How Canadian Markets Work

• 0:00
  When you look at a glossy real estate brochure
• 0:03
  for a new house, the first thing you notice is
• 0:06
  the presentation. Oh, absolutely. Yeah, the drone
• 0:09
  shots are spectacular. And the lighting is soft.
• 0:12
  The staging makes every room look, you know.
• 0:16
  expansive, you can almost see yourself living
• 0:18
  there. Right. It always looks perfect on paper.
• 0:20
  It does. But a smart buyer doesn't hand over
• 0:23
  their life savings based on the staging. They
• 0:25
  hire an inspector, they walk past that beautiful
• 0:28
  modern kitchen, and they go straight down into
• 0:30
  the dark, quiet basement to check the foundation.
• 0:33
  They're looking for the settling cracks that
• 0:36
  the builders might have hastily painted over.
• 0:39
  Because the physical reality of a structure is,
• 0:41
  well, it's almost always entirely different from
• 0:43
  the narrative of the marketing material. Exactly.
• 0:45
  Exactly. And today, we're taking a walk into
• 0:48
  the basement of the financial world. We are looking
• 0:50
  at the foundational mechanics of the initial
• 0:52
  public offering or IPO. It's such an important
• 0:55
  topic. It really is. We have a stack of source
• 0:59
  material today that outlines the gritty mechanical
• 1:02
  realities of why private companies actually go
• 1:05
  public. And we're going to slowly, methodically
• 1:08
  pull back the curtain on those glossy narratives
• 1:11
  you see on the financial news networks. We're
• 1:13
  going to look specifically at the structural
• 1:16
  plumbing. Yeah. Because when a successful, profitable
• 1:20
  private company is already doing beautifully,
• 1:22
  When the executive team already has complete
• 1:25
  control behind closed doors, you have to ask,
• 1:29
  why invite the intense scrutiny of the public
• 1:31
  markets? Right. Because if you read the press
• 1:34
  releases or watch the morning interviews on the
• 1:37
  day stock debuts, the stated reason is always
• 1:40
  the same. Always. It is a story about raising
• 1:42
  capital. The executives will say they have this
• 1:44
  brilliant vision to build a new manufacturing
• 1:46
  facility or expand into European markets. Or
• 1:49
  develop some revolutionary piece of technology.
• 1:51
  Exactly. And that vision requires hundreds of
• 1:53
  millions of dollars. And the public has capital
• 1:55
  they want to deploy. So in that narrative, the
• 1:58
  IPO is simply a noble bridge between innovation
• 2:01
  and funding. The stated motive is almost always
• 2:05
  capital expansion. But if you look at the source
• 2:09
  material, it reveals that the true mechanical
• 2:12
  driving force behind an IPO is usually liquidity.
• 2:15
  Liquidity. Yeah. It is about creating an exit
• 2:18
  strategy. I think we need to look at what liquidity
• 2:21
  actually means for the people running these companies.
• 2:24
  Because it's kind of like spending 10 years building
• 2:26
  a wildly successful local restaurant chain. You
• 2:30
  pour your life into it, and eventually the business
• 2:32
  is valued at, say, $50 million. You are technically
• 2:36
  very wealthy on paper. Right, on paper. But you
• 2:39
  can't buy a house with a commercial kitchen.
• 2:40
  Yeah. And you can't buy groceries with an equity
• 2:43
  stake in a private company. Your wealth is entirely
• 2:46
  trapped. Yeah, that is a highly way to visualize
• 2:49
  the friction of illiquid wealth. So you need
• 2:52
  a mechanism to slice that restaurant into millions
• 2:54
  of tiny pieces and sell them to strangers just
• 2:57
  so you can finally put actual cash in your wallet.
• 2:59
  Exactly. Yeah. You have founders, early employees
• 3:02
  holding stock options, and venture capital funds
• 3:05
  that have been waiting a decade for a return.
• 3:07
  Oh wow, yeah. That money is locked in a vault.
• 3:09
  And there is no secondary market for private
• 3:12
  shares. So the IPO is the exit door they have
• 3:15
  been meticulously building toward. I see. It
• 3:18
  establishes a liquid, highly traded secondary
• 3:21
  market where absolutely none existed before.
• 3:24
  Converting that trapped equity into usable cash
• 3:27
  is, well, it's the primary engine of the public
• 3:29
  offering machine. There are also secondary motives
• 3:32
  hiding in that structure, aren't there? I mean
• 3:34
  the shares themselves change function once they're
• 3:37
  publicly traded. They undergo a complete transformation.
• 3:40
  Once a company's equity has a publicly verifiable
• 3:42
  daily market price, those shares become a very
• 3:45
  powerful accepted currency. Oh, right. The company
• 3:48
  can use its own stock to acquire rival businesses
• 3:51
  without having to drain its actual cash reserve.
• 3:54
  That makes a lot of sense. And they can use stock
• 3:56
  units to lure top -tier executive talent. Plus,
• 3:59
  being publicly listed provides a massive boost
• 4:02
  in legitimacy. Large enterprise customers simply
• 4:05
  treat a heavily audited, publicly traded corporation
• 4:07
  with much more deference than a secretive private
• 4:10
  startup. But if achieving this liquidity and
• 4:13
  gaining this corporate legitimacy is so incredibly
• 4:16
  valuable, there has to be a severe toll. I mean,
• 4:20
  the market doesn't just hand out that kind of
• 4:21
  flexibility for free. No, the toll is severe.
• 4:25
  And it fundamentally changes the culture of the
• 4:27
  business. How so? Well, the compliance burden
• 4:30
  of transitioning from a private entity to a public
• 4:33
  one is grueling. You are essentially trading
• 4:37
  your corporate privacy for relentless, continuous
• 4:40
  disclosure. Ah, right. A public company has to
• 4:44
  report its financials quarterly and annually.
• 4:46
  They're forced to file material change reports
• 4:48
  every single time something significant alters
• 4:51
  the course of the business. And executive compensation
• 4:53
  and insider trading, that's all tracked, right?
• 4:56
  Tracked, scrutinized, and publicized. The accounting
• 4:58
  and audit costs alone immediately skyrocket into
• 5:02
  the millions of dollars every single year. It
• 5:04
  seems like an incredibly harsh transition for
• 5:06
  a management team that is used to just making
• 5:09
  unilateral decisions in a quiet room. It really
• 5:11
  is. They go from thinking in terms of five -year
• 5:14
  or 10 -year strategic horizons to constantly
• 5:17
  managing the expectations of a 90 -day quarterly
• 5:20
  cycle. The pressure of short -termism is arguably
• 5:24
  the heaviest burden. If you miss a quarterly
• 5:26
  earnings target by a single penny, the public
• 5:29
  market might ruthlessly punish your share price.
• 5:31
  Wow. But before they even have to face that quarterly
• 5:34
  pressure, they have to get through the door.
• 5:37
  And the door is the prospectus. Yes, the prospectus.
• 5:40
  The legal standard required for a prospectus
• 5:42
  is really fascinating. The exact wording is that
• 5:45
  it must contain full, true, and plain disclosure
• 5:48
  of all material facts relating to the securities
• 5:51
  being offered. That is a towering legal bar to
• 5:54
  clear. And the underwriters, the massive investment
• 5:57
  banks that stand between the issuing company
• 5:59
  and the public investors, they aren't just casually
• 6:01
  taking the company's word for it. They absolutely
• 6:04
  cannot afford to take the company's word. The
• 6:06
  underwriters share legal liability for any misstatements
• 6:09
  or omissions in that prospectus. Oh, really?
• 6:11
  Yes. Under securities law, if the issuing company
• 6:15
  lies, or deliberately hides a crucial damaging
• 6:19
  fact from the public, the underwriting bank can
• 6:22
  be sued right alongside the executives. So because
• 6:25
  the bank's own balance sheet, their long -standing
• 6:28
  reputation, and their legal safety are directly
• 6:30
  on the line, they are forced to do genuine exhaustive
• 6:34
  due diligence. Exactly. They basically have to
• 6:36
  act as that incredibly strict home inspector
• 6:39
  in the basement. Precisely. The lead underwriter
• 6:42
  brings in armies of corporate lawyers, forensic
• 6:45
  accountants, and industry specialists. They tear
• 6:48
  through the company's client contracts. They
• 6:51
  stress test the revenue models. They read years
• 6:53
  of internal executive emails. It's just looking
• 6:55
  for anything that could go wrong. Yes. They're
• 6:58
  actively searching for the structural cracks
• 7:00
  in the foundation, because if a crack is discovered
• 7:02
  after the stock is sold, the bank is going to
• 7:04
  pay for it. I was looking into how a regular
• 7:07
  investor actually accesses the results of all
• 7:09
  this intense scrutiny. And in Canada, for example,
• 7:12
  there is a system called Cedar Plus S. Every
• 7:15
  single prospectus, every piece of mandatory public
• 7:18
  disclosure is legally required to be filed there.
• 7:21
  And it's a completely free public national electronic
• 7:25
  database. It's a wonderful resource. It is. You
• 7:28
  don't need a Bloomberg terminal or a specialized
• 7:31
  broker. It is just sitting there waiting to be
• 7:33
  read. It is entirely accessible. But the reality
• 7:36
  is that... a final prospectus can run for hundreds
• 7:39
  of pages. Yeah, that's true. It's a dense, highly
• 7:42
  technical legal document designed to overwhelm
• 7:45
  the casual reader. So how do we navigate that?
• 7:47
  Because if we are staring down a 300 -page wall
• 7:50
  of legal text, we need to know exactly which
• 7:52
  rooms in the house to inspect first. Exactly.
• 7:55
  I always go straight to the section labeled risk
• 7:57
  factors. Risk factors is, without a doubt, the
• 7:59
  single most honest piece of corporate writing
• 8:01
  a company will ever produce. It feels almost
• 8:03
  counterintuitive at first glance, doesn't it?
• 8:05
  It does, yeah. The IPO process is essentially
• 8:08
  an extended marketing roadshow to sell the company
• 8:11
  at the highest possible valuation, yet this one
• 8:14
  mandatory section is brutally, meticulously honest
• 8:18
  about every single flaw in the business. But
• 8:20
  if we look at the legal liability of the underwriters
• 8:23
  we were just discussing, it makes perfect mechanical
• 8:25
  sense. Oh, right. Because of the fear of being
• 8:28
  sued? Exactly. The underlying mechanism is motivated
• 8:32
  pessimism. The corporate marketing team wants
• 8:35
  to paint a glorious high -growth picture of the
• 8:38
  future. But the securities lawyers drafting the
• 8:41
  risk factors section, they want absolutely every
• 8:44
  conceivable threat disclosed on the record. So
• 8:47
  they just list everything. Everything. They will
• 8:49
  list everything from a dependency on a single
• 8:51
  semiconductor supplier in Taiwan to the lack
• 8:54
  of an executive succession plan to looming regulatory
• 8:57
  battles in Europe. Because if the lawyers officially
• 9:00
  warn the public that the basement floods during
• 9:02
  heavy rain and then it actually floods two years
• 9:05
  later, the shareholders cannot sue the company
• 9:07
  for deception. clearly disclosed the hazard.
• 9:10
  Exactly. A specific risk that you actively warn
• 9:14
  the public about is infinitely harder to build
• 9:16
  a class action lawsuit over. That makes so much
• 9:18
  sense. Therefore, the legal teams are financially
• 9:21
  and professionally motivated to be as pessimistic
• 9:24
  and comprehensive as possible. It is a rare legally
• 9:28
  enforced moment of corporate candor. So, the
• 9:31
  risk factors show us exactly where the house
• 9:34
  might leak, but what about the cash we're handing
• 9:36
  over? If I am buying shares, I want to know where
• 9:40
  my specific dollars are going. And that leads
• 9:43
  us directly to the use of proceeds section. The
• 9:46
  use of proceeds tracks the actual flow of capital.
• 9:49
  It tells the prospective buyer precisely how
• 9:52
  the hundreds of millions of dollars raised in
• 9:54
  the offering will be deployed. If we go back
• 9:56
  to the restaurant analogy, it's like a friend
• 9:58
  asking for a massive investment in their business.
• 10:00
  Right. You need to know, are they using your
• 10:02
  money to build a second commercial kitchen, hire
• 10:05
  better chefs and expand the seating area? Or
• 10:07
  are they simply taking your investment to pay
• 10:09
  off their own original bank loan so they can
• 10:11
  quietly walk away? That distinction is critical.
• 10:14
  In a prospectus, if you read the use of proceeds
• 10:18
  and the funds are clearly designated for building
• 10:20
  new manufacturing facilities or funding research
• 10:23
  and development, then the newly raised capital
• 10:26
  is going directly into the corporate treasury.
• 10:28
  Okay, so that's good for the business. Yes, those
• 10:31
  are called primary shares. The company itself
• 10:34
  is becoming structurally stronger and better
• 10:36
  capitalized. But if we read that section and
• 10:38
  it reveals something entirely different, what
• 10:40
  if the money isn't going into the treasury? If
• 10:43
  the proceeds are largely designated to cash out
• 10:46
  existing shareholders, meaning the money is being
• 10:49
  used to buy the shares currently held by the
• 10:51
  early venture capital funds or the original founders,
• 10:54
  those are secondary shares. Oh, wow. So you're
• 10:57
  just paying them out. Exactly. In that scenario,
• 11:00
  the company itself receives absolutely no capital
• 11:03
  from your investment. The business does not get
• 11:05
  a single new piece of equipment. You have simply
• 11:08
  provided the exit liquidity for someone else
• 11:10
  to leave the table. That is wild. Both structures
• 11:13
  are completely legal and both are clearly disclosed,
• 11:17
  but they represent profoundly different investments
• 11:19
  in the future of the entity. That shifts the
• 11:22
  perspective entirely. So we have found the risks
• 11:25
  and we have tracked cash. But what if the money
• 11:27
  is flowing into the treasury only to quietly
• 11:30
  leak out the back door to the insiders? Ah. That
• 11:34
  brings us to the related party transactions.
• 11:37
  The related party transactions section requires
• 11:40
  the company to disclose any business it is conducting
• 11:42
  with entities controlled by its own insiders.
• 11:46
  Give us a mechanical example of how that works
• 11:48
  in practice. Well, you're looking to see who's
• 11:50
  standing on both sides of a contract. For instance,
• 11:53
  does the company lease its corporate headquarters
• 11:55
  from a private real estate trust that just happens
• 11:58
  to be wholly owned by the CEO? Oh, I see. Or
• 12:01
  is the company purchasing all of its critical
• 12:03
  software from a vendor owned by a board member's
• 12:06
  spouse? Is the company paying exorbitant consulting
• 12:09
  fees to a former founder who no longer works
• 12:12
  there? But it's not inherently illegal for the
• 12:15
  CEO to own the building, is it? It is not illegal,
• 12:18
  provided it is disclosed, but it reveals a structural
• 12:21
  leak. It shows you exactly where shareholder
• 12:24
  value might be quietly siphoned away for the
• 12:27
  public investors and redirected into the private
• 12:29
  pockets of the management team. So if we read
• 12:32
  the risk factors, track the use of proceeds,
• 12:35
  and audit the related party transactions, we
• 12:37
  have a very clear picture of the foundation.
• 12:40
  You do. But even with a perfect understanding
• 12:42
  of the documents, as a public investor buying
• 12:45
  into an IPO, are we ever actually walking onto
• 12:48
  a level playing field with the insiders? We are
• 12:50
  not. We are walking into a structurally rigged
• 12:54
  game. A rigged game. Yes. To understand the IPO
• 12:57
  market, we have to acknowledge the harsh unforgiving
• 13:00
  reality of information asymmetry. The seller
• 13:03
  simply possesses far more data than the buyer.
• 13:06
  The insiders have spent a decade looking at the
• 13:08
  internal metrics, and we've spent, what, an hour
• 13:11
  reading a sanitized legal document? Exactly.
• 13:14
  And that asymmetry extends to the ultimate advantage.
• 13:16
  The insiders dictate the exact timing of the
• 13:19
  sale. Right, they don't have to sell if they
• 13:20
  don't want to. A private company is under no
• 13:23
  obligation to go public on a random Tuesday in
• 13:25
  November. They wait patiently. They pick the
• 13:28
  precise macroeconomic moment when market liquidity
• 13:32
  is highest, when the specific sector they operate
• 13:35
  in is trending heavily in the news, and when
• 13:37
  their own internal growth metrics look their
• 13:39
  absolute best. So they are choosing to sell the
• 13:42
  house right after they painted the walls during
• 13:45
  a period of historically low interest rates at
• 13:47
  the absolute peak of the spring real estate market.
• 13:50
  Precisely. They hold maximum information and
• 13:52
  they time the public offering to maximize their
• 13:54
  own valuation. But the mechanical disadvantage
• 13:58
  for the public buyer doesn't end on opening day.
• 14:01
  We also have to look carefully at the lockup
• 14:03
  expiration. The lockup period is a mechanism
• 14:05
  you constantly hear whispered about in the months
• 14:08
  following a high -profile IPO. Walk us through
• 14:10
  how that actually functions. When a company goes
• 14:12
  public, the underwriters require the insiders,
• 14:15
  the founders, the executives, the early venture
• 14:17
  funds, to sign a legally binding agreement promising
• 14:20
  not to sell their existing shares for a set period.
• 14:23
  Usually, this is precisely 180 days or roughly
• 14:26
  six months. It is mechanically designed to prevent
• 14:29
  all the insiders from dumping their equity on
• 14:31
  the open market on day one, which would immediately
• 14:34
  crash the share price and destroy the offering.
• 14:36
  So for the first six months, the supply of available
• 14:39
  shares on the public market is artificially constrained.
• 14:42
  Yes. But the date that lockup expires is publicly
• 14:46
  printed in the prospectus. It is a known ticking
• 14:49
  clock. What happens to the supply and demand
• 14:52
  curve on day 100 anyone? When that lockup window
• 14:55
  opens, the total supply of available shares can
• 14:58
  multiply overnight. Oh, wow. Let's say the company
• 15:00
  floated 10 million shares in the IPO, but the
• 15:03
  insiders hold 40 million shares. On day 181,
• 15:07
  the potential float expands from 10 million to
• 15:09
  50 million. That's a huge jump. It is. If public
• 15:13
  demand does not massively rise to absorb that
• 15:15
  sudden tidal wave of new supply, the basic laws
• 15:18
  of economics dictate that the share price must
• 15:20
  fall. That is a terrifying structural hazard
• 15:24
  for a retail investor who just bought into the
• 15:26
  stock in month five, completely unaware of the
• 15:29
  massive supply cliff rapidly approaching in month
• 15:31
  six. It happens all the time. And this specific
• 15:34
  mechanical reality, the perfect peak timing of
• 15:37
  the initial sale combined with the looming hazard
• 15:40
  of the lockup expiration, is exactly why the
• 15:43
  empirical research on long run IPO performance
• 15:45
  is incredibly mixed. Right. While some companies
• 15:48
  obviously go on to be generational successes,
• 15:51
  broad academic studies often show that, on average,
• 15:55
  IPOs tend to underperform comparable established
• 15:58
  public companies over the subsequent three to
• 16:00
  five years. Because the IPO companies were priced
• 16:03
  for absolute perfection at the very peak of their
• 16:06
  cycle while their supply was artificially restricted.
• 16:08
  Exactly. I want to push back on something, though,
• 16:10
  regarding the pricing. OK. Because we always
• 16:12
  see the financial news networks celebrating a
• 16:14
  massive first day pop. The stock gets priced
• 16:17
  at $20 by the underwriters, it opens for trading
• 16:19
  on the exchange at $28, there is confetti falling
• 16:22
  on the floor, and the executive team is cheering
• 16:25
  on television. That narrative is sold to the
• 16:29
  public as a monumental triumph for the business.
• 16:32
  It is. And the preservation of that specific
• 16:35
  illusion is one of the most remarkable feats
• 16:38
  of public relations in modern finance. Really?
• 16:41
  Let's calmly dismantle that narrative by looking
• 16:45
  at the specific math of equity dilution. Okay,
• 16:47
  let's walk through the numbers. Suppose our theoretical
• 16:50
  company issues 10 million shares to the public.
• 16:53
  The underwriting bank prices those shares at
• 16:56
  $20 each. The company has successfully raised
• 16:59
  $200 million in capital. Okay, 10 million shares,
• 17:03
  $20 each. $200 million goes into the corporate
• 17:06
  treasury. By issuing those 10 million shares,
• 17:08
  the company has diluted its existing ownership.
• 17:11
  They gave away a specific percentage of their
• 17:13
  total equity in exchange for that $200 million.
• 17:16
  Right. They sold a piece of the pie. Now, the
• 17:18
  market opens for trading. The demand is a frenzy.
• 17:23
  The stock instantly pops and begins trading at
• 17:25
  $28 a share. And everyone cheer. The financial
• 17:29
  press declares the IPO a massive success. But
• 17:33
  let's look quietly at the math. If the open market
• 17:36
  was immediately willing to pay $28 for those
• 17:39
  shares, 10 million shares at $28 is $280 million.
• 17:45
  Wait. So the company gave away that specific
• 17:47
  percentage of their equity and they collected
• 17:49
  $200 million. But the open market valued that
• 17:53
  exact same slice of equity at $280 million on
• 17:57
  the very same morning. Exactly. Which means the
• 18:00
  company, the entity that actually needs the capital
• 18:02
  to build factories and hire engineers, just left
• 18:05
  $80 million on the table. Yes. For the exact
• 18:08
  same equity dilution, they received $80 million
• 18:10
  less than the market was willing to provide.
• 18:13
  And that $80 million did not vanish. It is not
• 18:16
  a theoretical number. So where does it go? It
• 18:18
  goes directly into the accounts of the initial
• 18:19
  buyers. The initial buyers. The select elite
• 18:22
  group of institutional investors, hedge funds,
• 18:25
  and well -connected private wealth clients who
• 18:28
  were allocated those shares by the underwriter
• 18:31
  at the initial $20 offering price. Oh, I see.
• 18:34
  They bought the shares at $20. the market opened
• 18:36
  at 28, and those institutions captured that $80
• 18:40
  million in pure instantaneous profit. Wait, let
• 18:44
  me challenge the mechanics of this. If the underwriting
• 18:46
  bank has armies of analysts and they know the
• 18:50
  market demand is strong enough that the clearing
• 18:52
  price will be $28, Why wouldn't the bank just
• 18:55
  price the IPO at $28 and give the company that
• 18:58
  extra $80 million? That is a very good question.
• 19:01
  Don't they have a duty to secure the most capital
• 19:03
  for the issuing company? Why do they intentionally
• 19:05
  underprice it? That is the crucial structural
• 19:07
  question. You have to look at the dual client
• 19:09
  dilemma of the investment bank. OK. The underwriting
• 19:13
  bank represents the IPO company for a single
• 19:15
  transaction. But that same bank represents massive
• 19:19
  institutional investors like pension funds and
• 19:21
  hedge funds every single day of the year. The
• 19:25
  bank relies on those institutions for billions
• 19:27
  in continuous trading commissions. By intentionally
• 19:30
  under -pricing the IPO, the bank is essentially
• 19:33
  manufacturing a risk -free gift for its most
• 19:36
  lucrative long -term institutional clients. So
• 19:39
  the first day pop is not a triumph for the issuing
• 19:42
  company at all. Not at all. It is a massive instantaneous
• 19:45
  transfer of wealth away from the IPO company
• 19:48
  directly into the pockets of the bank's favorite
• 19:51
  institutional clients. And the issuing company
• 19:54
  is the one paying for that gift through unnecessary
• 19:57
  equity dilution. It is a phenomenal wealth transfer.
• 20:00
  The executives are cheering on the floor of the
• 20:02
  stock exchange while their company effectively
• 20:04
  pays an 80 million dollar hidden tax just to
• 20:07
  generate a positive news cycle and reward the
• 20:10
  underwriters best clients. And where does the
• 20:12
  retail investor fit into this transaction? Ordinary
• 20:15
  retail investors almost never receive allocations
• 20:17
  in genuinely hot oversubscribed IPOs at the initial
• 20:20
  offering price. The institutions take all those
• 20:23
  allocations. So if a normal person logs into
• 20:26
  their brokerage account and buys the stock on
• 20:28
  opening morning, they are not getting it at $20.
• 20:31
  They are buying it in the open market at $28.
• 20:33
  They are the ones providing the exit liquidity
• 20:36
  that funds that $80 million pop for the hedge
• 20:39
  funds. Exactly. Buying into the pop just means
• 20:42
  paying the higher inflated number after the wealth
• 20:44
  transfer has already been fully executed. Precisely.
• 20:48
  If an IPO opens completely flat, Meaning, if
• 20:50
  it is priced at $20 and trades all day at exactly
• 20:54
  $20, the media will call it a failure. Right,
• 20:57
  because there's no dramatic pop. But mechanically,
• 21:00
  a flat open means the bank priced the offering
• 21:03
  perfectly and the company kept every single dollar
• 21:06
  of capital for itself without transferring any
• 21:08
  wealth to the installations. We really have taken
• 21:11
  a long, deliberate walk through the plumbing
• 21:13
  today. We have. Let's recap the mechanics we've
• 21:15
  uncovered. We started by realizing that despite
• 21:18
  the noble narrative of raising capital for innovation,
• 21:22
  the IPO machine is heavily driven by the need
• 21:24
  for liquidity. Right. Slicing up illiquid equity
• 21:28
  to create an exit door for trapped founders in
• 21:31
  venture funds. We saw that the cost of that liquidity
• 21:34
  is a grueling compliance burden and a profound
• 21:37
  shift toward quarterly short -termism. And we
• 21:40
  also examine the underwriters whose terror of
• 21:43
  shared legal liability forces them to enforce
• 21:46
  a standard of full, true, and plain disclosure.
• 21:50
  We walked through how to read a prospectus on
• 21:52
  cedar plus dairy. We bypassed the marketing and
• 21:55
  go straight to the risk factors to see the motivated
• 21:57
  pessimism of the lawyers. We check the use of
• 22:00
  proceeds to determine if our money is funding
• 22:02
  the future or just providing exit liquidity for
• 22:05
  the founders. Right. And we audit the related
• 22:07
  party transactions to track the capital leaking
• 22:09
  out the back door to insiders. We acknowledge
• 22:12
  the inherent information asymmetry where insiders
• 22:15
  perfectly time the peak of the market to sell
• 22:17
  their equity. And we detailed the structural
• 22:19
  hazard. of the lockup expiration, which can flood
• 22:22
  the market with supply after 180 days. And finally,
• 22:26
  we dismantled the confetti of the first -day
• 22:28
  pop, revealing it as a massive intentional wealth
• 22:32
  transfer from the issuing company to the underwriters'
• 22:35
  favored institutional clients. leaving the retail
• 22:38
  investor holding the bag at the inflated price.
• 22:42
  It fundamentally alters how you view the entire
• 22:44
  ecosystem. It does. It strips away the glossy
• 22:46
  drone footage and leaves you staring at the raw
• 22:49
  concrete of the foundation, which leads to one
• 22:52
  final thought that stems from all these mechanics.
• 22:55
  Over the last decade, we have seen a massive
• 22:57
  rise in private equity, and we see companies
• 23:00
  choosing to stay private for much, much longer
• 23:02
  than they used to. It is a profound shift in
• 23:05
  the broader financial landscape. It is. So if
• 23:07
  the traditional IPO process requires a company
• 23:10
  to endure grueling compliance, face intense quarterly
• 23:13
  short -termism, navigate a structurally rigged
• 23:16
  wealth transfer to institutional clients, and
• 23:18
  pay exorbitant fees to underwriters, we have
• 23:21
  to ask ourselves, are companies staying private
• 23:23
  longer just because private capital is abundant?
• 23:26
  Or are they deliberately avoiding the public
• 23:29
  markets because the foundational mechanics of
• 23:32
  the modern IPO are fundamentally broken? That
• 23:35
  is a question that challenges the entire premise
• 23:38
  of public market innovation. We can just let
• 23:40
  that thought sit quietly in the room. When you
• 23:43
  finally take the time to inspect the foundation,
• 23:45
  the glossy brochure never quite looks the same
• 23:48
  again. Thank you, as always, for taking this
• 23:50
  slow methodical walk with us and joining us on
• 23:52
  this deep dive. Take care.