- Comments (19)
- Text Size: Down Up
moneysense.ca, 18/05/11
Have Investors Learned Anything From the Tech Bubble?
The lofty valuation of LinkedIn, the massively popular professional networking site, makes one wonder if investors have forgotten the perils of paying too much for a stock, however sexy its prospects may be, a mere decade after the bursting of the technology bubble. LinkedIn, which will start trading tomorrow under the ticker symbol LNKD sold 7.84 million shares at $45 each valuing the company at $4.25 billion.
According to its registration statement available here, LinkedIn revenues were $161 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2010. If we assume that LinkedIn doubled its 2009 sales, its revenues for financial year would amount to $240 million. That would mean investors are valuing the company at 17.7 times previous year sales. LinkedIn is only barely profitable. In the first nine months of 2010, LinkedIn earned just $1.8 million. If we assume that the company earned $4 million in FY2010, it would mean that the company is sporting a trailing p/e of over 1,000. Registered users, unique visitors and page views — not revenues and income — are called “key metrics” in the registration statement. In the late nineties, the buzz word used to be “eyeballs”.
LinkedIn is not the only company valued at eye-popping levels. Microsoft recently acquired Skype for $8.5 billion. The press release that announced the acquisition makes no mention of any financial metrics but trumpets the number of users Skype has and the volume of traffic on Skype’s network. Skype reportedly had total revenues of $860 million and a net loss of $7 million in 2010. Groupon, Twitter and Facebook are all rumoured to be IPO candidates priced at similarly nose bleed levels. Some of these companies could turn out to be the next Google or Amazon but at these prices a lot of that potential is probably already priced in. And investors should recall that rich valuations also have the potential to end in tears.
moneysense.ca, 18/05/11









CC, you are so right, I just shake my head sometimes. Imagine how ridiculous this looks to me, when I can grab one of my clients financial statements that have a valuation 40 times less than LinkedIn, yet has net income 5 times as high but is not sexy, because it just makes money and it is not involved with “social media”. Now I know LNKD has “awesome potential”, but if I put LinkedIn’s financial beside my clients and deleted the names, guess which companys stock you would purchase?
It worries me that people are paying a premium for the so-called “potential” of social media sites. Just because there are a lot of eye-balls on the site doesn’t necessarily translate into a lot of revenue. Look at YouTube, which was bought for $1.65B and had less than $200M in annual revenues. Are they turning a profit for Google yet?
But that looks like a bargain compared to LinkedIn. What concerns me about LinkedIn, Facebook, and others is that in order to start generating the kind of revenue that will lead to a decent ROI they will either need to come up with some sort of subscription model or else they will target ads in a way that will disrupt the user experience.
Why do these sites have so many users now? Because it’s cool and it’s free. Take one or both of those away and people will find an alternative to meet their needs.
And here I thought key metrics for an investment would be revenue, profits, profit margins, earnings growth….how naive of me!
Everytime I here .com IPO, I think of Pets.com IPO of 2000.
It’s interesting that the new tech stocks are so expensive, while a lot of the older tech stocks (Cisco, Dell, Intel, even RIM) are cheap and sitting on mountains of cash. Things can change quickly I suppose.
people never learn, the connected money is already in that stock..once the flood gates open they wait for the suckers to get in while they sell. Look at ZIP, the company has been bleeding money since its inception and the stock is trading in the mid 20′s. Thats the reason the retail investor barely makes money, they invest in crap companies.
fully agree with you. Investors (even corporations) have short memory in this case.
We, humans, like to watch the same movie again and again and again….
Well, so much for “overvaluation”. LNKD is trading at $85 now!
IPO – It’s Probably Overpriced.
There is a sucker born every minute.
As you say, it’s been 10 years. How many suckers is that?
Come on! place your orders right now. It’s the next Apple.
In the words of my friend in the tech field: “it is like 1999 all over again.”
[...] Canadian Capitalist wonders if Investors Learned Anything From the Tech Bubble? [...]
[...] Capitalist warns people about crazy valuations in the tech world and wonders if there is another bubble ready to burst. All you have to do is check out the numbers around SKYPE and [...]
[...] Have Investors Learned Anything From the Tech Bubble? @ Canadian Capitalist [...]
[...] Have Investors Learned Anything From the Tech Bubble? @ Canadian Capitalist [...]
[...] Canadian Capitalist. Have investors learned anything from the tech bubble? “The lofty valuation of LinkedIn, the massively popular professional networking site, makes one wonder if investors have forgotten the perils of paying too much for a stock, however sexy its prospects may be, a mere decade after the bursting of the technology bubble.” [...]
Interesting to see the high valuations, I remember on google groups a few years back when RIM was trading at 60 times earnings and I was asking people if they would ever buy a business themselves for 60 times annual earnings? One guy thought that the P/E was a result of quarterly earnings…To maintain the stock price that company has to grow grow grow and I just don’t see it as a prudent way to invest. That being said RIM @ >7 times earnings has to do pretty awfully in the future to be considered currently fairly valued.
Great post thanks
[...] however sexy its prospects may be, a mere decade after the bursting of the technology bubble…read more Posted by donmaycock Planning-Tips Subscribe to RSS [...]
[...] problem though remains the same. Essentially, one is investing in a trend and what may be popular may not be right. Groupon, for example, has never turned a profit, burns [...]