Slashdot Mirror


Google IPO Swami

The Google IPO Swami writes: "I'm running an experiment and Slashdot readers would be good contributors. As you may know, Google recently announced that they will be using a unique dutch auction structure to price shares of their IPO. Instead of having the underwriters determine the opening price, the price will be set by the demand of investors that register to participate. I'm interested in how well the public can estimate this demand and the price of the shares to be offered. I'm giving away free shares in Google to find out. The person that comes closest to estimating the opening and closing price of the stock on the IPO date will win shares in the company."

255 comments

  1. euhm ... by cnf · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Here goes nothing ...

    20$ - 80$ ?

    1. Re:euhm ... by skasingularity · · Score: 5, Funny
      Is that all google is to you? $80?

      NO GMAIL FOR YOU!

    2. Re:euhm ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't all the numbers in thousands, so that's $80,000?

    3. Re:euhm ... by jdrogers · · Score: 0, Troll

      Heads up: You have to submit your estimate on the site linked in the story.

    4. Re:euhm ... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      Is that all google is to you? $80?

      I'd be completely amazed if this stock was more than $15. It's a friggin search engine company. IBM might be worth $80/share, but Google is not.

    5. Re:euhm ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      So if IBM has 200B shares is it still a bargin? What if google released 100 shares, what would you buy them for - 80 dollars still? Share price != the value of the company. Market Value of the company = Share Price * No. of outstanding shares.

    6. Re:euhm ... by Three+Headed+Man · · Score: 1

      Thank you, I seriously never would have known unless you told me to RTFA.

      --
      I'm probably at the karma cap. Mod up a funny troll instead, it lightens the mood :)
    7. Re:euhm ... by E_elven · · Score: 0, Troll

      You have no idea how stupid people are, do you?

      --
      Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    8. Re:euhm ... by ComputerSlicer23 · · Score: 5, Informative
      Uhhh, you're a complete idiot. You know this right? Without knowing how many shares available, and what percentage are going to be available to the public, there's no way you could guess what the price of the shares are intelligently.

      See, if Google released but a single share, that represented 50% of the company, I bet that single share would be measured in billions of dollars.

      If they release 100 Trillion shares, my guess is, fractions of a penny will be the value.

      Now it is a good idea to keep your stock price in the $5-$25 price point as it's then a pretty liquid stock, because most investors can afford lots of 100 (generally the smallest unit stocks are sold in by brokers, breaking a lot costs you extra). Institutional investors like pretty liquid stock prices, as they can get in and out of them pretty easily. I know that AT&T was considering doing stock splits to get their price back to about $10 not too long ago specifically to make it attractive to institutional investors.

      If you are interested in long term investors only, you avoid stock splits, and keep the price going up. Look at Berkshire Hathaway for an example of this. There shares are worth about $90,000 for the "good ones", and about $6,000 for the "Baby Berks". They specifically never split, and never offer a dividend. It's an interesting model.

      If you want to use a single metric to define if a company is worth something, at least use P/E. That's at least something kinda, sorta rational. It takes into account the number of shares, and generally there is an acceptable P/E for any given industry. The P/E of IBM and google could exactly the same, and have IBM's stock at $15, and Google's at $80. You deride that, but any serious investor would realize that the stock price has nothing to do with the value of the company. It's the stock price, and the number of shares that starts to tell you something intelligent. (I believe that number of shares, times the share price is the market capitalization).

      Kirby

    9. Re:euhm ... by E_elven · · Score: 1

      Bah. Moderators. How many Joe Sixpacks know what the actual value of Google is? How many actually know anything apart from what Fox news says -like, for example, how the stock market works, how a stock should be valued, what to look for in predicting the actual value?

      They don't know that. All they know is that everyone else is paying $26 for it and soon it'll be $30 and then I will have $4 profit when I sell!

      The stock market isn't about investing in companies. It's not about investing in the futures of companies. It's about investing in futures of stocks, guessing which one will be favoured and which not.

      --
      Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    10. Re:euhm ... by vilms · · Score: 1

      Firts explanation of anything vaguely stock-markety that I've understood...EVAH.

      Thanks.

    11. Re:euhm ... by the+morgawr · · Score: 1
      The stock market isn't about investing in companies. It's not about investing in the futures of companies. It's about investing in futures of stocks, guessing which one will be favoured and which not.

      What you are talking about here refers to stock SPECULATION.

      --
      The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
    12. Re:euhm ... by the+morgawr · · Score: 1
      As I said above serious investors look for descrepencies between what a stock is worth and what it costs (usually by looking at the balance sheet). Speculators treat prices as if they have nothing to do with the value of the company and attempt to make money by trading on the stock.

      They are two compleatly different ball games played on the same field. It leads to some very interesting occurances.

      --
      The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
  2. Who knows? by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One thing that this data will almost certainly show is that data entered today will we totally wild guesses and be totally disconnected from the real factors that determine the IPO price.

    Macro-economic factors such as interest rates, price of oil, unemployment, and who the US President will be on the date of the IPO are still unknown. Hey, even the date of the IPO is still an unknown!

    Bookmark the site and revisit it as Google gets further along the road to IPO. That's the only way to win at this game unless you're an extremely good guesser.

    1. Re:Who knows? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      What do those factors have to do with the price of a tech ipo?

      Not a damn thing.

    2. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Bookmark the site and revisit it as Google gets further along the road to IPO. That's the only way to win at this game unless you're an extremely good guesser.

      But by then all the good guesses will be gone!

      How does the site handle multiple guesses around the same value - first come, first serve? I know so little about stocks that an extremely good guess is the best I could ever come up with anyway. But given that they are supposed to be chaotic, perhaps that's the same for everyone who's even in the ballpark.

    3. Re:Who knows? by gregfortune · · Score: 1

      And it doesn't matter how early you guess if someone else guesses the same value...

      "Ties will be settled by a random drawing."

      On the other hand, guess now and then guess again later if you think you were wrong.

      "You can enter multiple times, but only your last estimate will be considered. Previous entries will be discarded if you re-submit your picks."

    4. Re:Who knows? by in7ane · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, no, no, you got it all wrong. Winning is certain:

      Two 0-999 ranges
      i.e. 1000*1000 possible combinations Need 1,000,000 submissions to 'win'

      Spamgourmet.com allows dynamic forwarding

      g000000.2.name@spamgourmet.com
      To
      g999999.2.name@spamgourmet.com

      Here I come!

      /wonders if a few minutes to write the script is worth it for a few shares...

    5. Re:Who knows? by gregfortune · · Score: 1

      See my post right below the parent...

      Ties will be settled by a random drawing

    6. Re:Who knows? by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What do those factors have to do with the price of a tech ipo?

      Because Google's stock has to compete in the universe of all investments. In short, the value of a share of Google will be in part influced by the value of all other potential investments available.

      Each macro force has very little direct impact on the Google price, but there's a whole lot of them out there, and they all add up...

    7. Re:Who knows? by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, googles stock has to compete with other stocks/bonds/etc but that doesn't mean that the stock will exhibit rational behavior on the day it IPO's.

      You are looking at the stock market as a pure numbers game when a large factor in the rise and/or fall of googles stock on IPO day will be how people 'feel'.

      That is what caused the tulip trouble and the dot com trouble.

    8. Re:Who knows? by tunah · · Score: 4, Funny
      /wonders if a few minutes to write the script is worth it for a few shares...

      Well, that depends how much you think the shares will be worth...

      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
    9. Re:Who knows? by glk572 · · Score: 1

      You assume that stock prices are based in reality.

      --
      Well art is art isn't it, but then again water is water; and east is east; and west is west; and if you take cranberries
    10. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See FAQ

      "Can I Enter More than Once?
      You can enter multiple times, but only your last estimate will be considered. Previous entries will be discarded if you re-submit your picks."

    11. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "but only your last estimate will be considered"

      The unique identifier being the e-mail address - which is different for each submission (see grandparent). OK, if you want to argue that *.name@spamgourmet.com will be filtered how about just using something1,2,3...@your own domain and setting everything to forward to a mailbox until the win (surely more than one entry per domain is allowed).

    12. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why do you assume integer prices? AFAIK the prices allow also fractions in multiples of 1/64, which means that the total number of combinations is in fact 1000^2*64^2 = 64000^2 = 4,096,000,000.

    13. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Actually even being in the US, the market has in fact been decimalized, so 1/100th now. However "The value must be between 0 and 999, inclusive" seems to suggest integer values, since otherwise it would be 0 to 999.99, no?

    14. Re:Who knows? by wash23 · · Score: 1

      Actually it's 100,000*100,000 = 10,000,000,000 combinations if you use a more reasonable increment of 1 cent :)

    15. Re:Who knows? by raehl · · Score: 1

      Only if they wanted to allow 999.01->999.99 as potential guesses. There's certainly no reason that they HAVE to make those extra 99 choices available.

    16. Re:Who knows? by mveloso · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dude, don't you know anything about the stock market? Fundamentals make no difference. See:

      http://www.blogmaverick.com/

      for a real-world view of the market. He says it better than I could. Scroll down to the "Why do people fall in love with stocks" entry. Here's the direct link:

      http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/98171364703023 36 /

      Enjoy and learn!

    17. Re:Who knows? by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else notice the line that said:

      "This site is not operated by Google."

      How, exactly, does this guy propose to give away shares of stock that's not available yet, and he may not own (even post-IPO).

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    18. Re:Who knows? by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 1

      What's the tulip trouble?

      --
      Sivaram Velauthapillai
      Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
    19. Re:Who knows? by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 1

      Since google is traded on the open market, he/she just has to go and buy a few. I'm assuming that the person is going to give the stock well after the actual IPO.

      Sivaram Velauthapillai

      --
      Sivaram Velauthapillai
      Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
    20. Re:Who knows? by kubis · · Score: 3, Informative

      The same shit as dotcom bubble, but not with processors but tulips. see wikipedia

    21. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the stock will exhibit rational behavior"

      given that the shares of stock are inanimate objects, I would hope they won't exhibit any behavior whatsoever.

    22. Re:Who knows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would ask the same of you.

    23. Re:Who knows? by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      He doesn't have to aquire the shares in the IPO process... just place a market order on the first day if his IPO bid fails.

  3. Its good... by Mr.+Troll · · Score: 1

    Anyone else think its good that Google isn't releaseing guidance about upcoming quarters? /all spelling errors intentional

    --
    Kiss my shiny metal ass
    1. Re:Its good... by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      The problem with this strategy is that their business is not well understood by most investors, and the interpreters of complex businesses (Wall St. analysts) really like having some foundation to build on (it doesn't have to be earnings down to the penny, but an idea of revenue growth, potential cost structures, etc. If they get surprised too often, they label the company as erratic and start issuing negative reports driving the stock price down. To avoid this Google must have exceedingly consistent results (reducing the need for guidance) or begin issuing guidance.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
  4. I'm sure to win this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Martha Stewart has some "special" information she passed in to me.

    1. Re:I'm sure to win this by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't take her advice. Afterall, the "insider info" that she was convicted of covering up was a tip to sell the stock shortly before news that the main product of IMClone was about to suffer a setback at the FDA.

      However, the drug wasn't dead. And in fact, it overcame that bad study to eventually be approved. Martha's decision to sell the stock in the long run turned out to be a mistake. She would have made money if she kept the shares between then and now...

    2. Re:I'm sure to win this by devilspgd · · Score: 1

      You could have made more if you sold it all, then bought the same number of shares back after it tanked (before it recovered) -- In general, this is fairly safe when you have reason to believe a stock is about to tank, since you're only risking a small portion of your winnings on the boundback.

      --
      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    3. Re:I'm sure to win this by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      You could have made more if you sold it all, then bought the same number of shares back after it tanked (before it recovered) -- In general, this is fairly safe when you have reason to believe a stock is about to tank, since you're only risking a small portion of your winnings on the boundback.

      That would presume Martha had more info than she actually had. She just knew the stock was headed down... she didn't quite know why.

  5. Here .... by charlos · · Score: 0

    Well based on what I have researched ... $65

  6. how about by mikeeeeeee · · Score: 0

    nothing, they went broke because of this and your prize is worthless!!

  7. Mmm...google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you have any shares in that watermelon flavour? That's my favourite.

  8. WINNER! by sketchkid · · Score: 1

    opening: 23.65 closing: 46.13

    --


    ------
    [insert funny .sig here]
    1. Re:WINNER! by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      opening: 23.65 closing: 46.13

      That's highly unlikely. There shouldn't be very many people wishing they had gotten in on the IPO and willing to pay more the same day just by the nature of this Dutch auction scheme. The whole point of choosing this method is to lock out the rich people who want to quickly double their money on same day turn arounds...

    2. Re:WINNER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The whole point of choosing this method is to lock out the rich people who want to quickly double their money on same day turn arounds...

      Why do you all hate the greedy rich so? They're people too.
    3. Re:WINNER! by SpinyNorman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep - the dutch auction format ensures that anyone who wants to can buy at the IPO price, so they'd be nuts to pay more for it after the fact (no doubt some people will do it regardless, but then they're doubly stupid for a) paying more than they need, and b) paying a price determined only by others like themselves!).

      I'd expect a close pretty close (+/-) to the open.

    4. Re:WINNER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked you couldn't just buy a stock and resell it that day. You have to hold it for a time or face a penalty.

    5. Re:WINNER! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Day tradding...buying and selling by the MINUTE!!!

      I happen to agree with you that there should be penalty for less than a day sales, but it's not in the law.

    6. Re:WINNER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell no. You may have to pay fees if you are a pattern day trader, but assuming you don't do it often, you are free to buy and sell on the same day.

    7. Re:WINNER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Last time I checked you couldn't just buy a stock and resell it that day. You have to hold it for a time or face a penalty.

      You've been listening to too many Ralph Nader campaign speeches.

  9. HOW MANY shares? by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

    Why be vague on this detail? Is the reward a fixed number of shares, a dollar figure translated into stock, or what?

    1. Re:HOW MANY shares? by RockyMountain · · Score: 5, Informative

      HOW MANY shares?

      It's right there in the FAQ. 10 shares.

    2. Re:HOW MANY shares? by DoraLives · · Score: 1
      Why be vague on this detail? Is the reward a fixed number of shares, a dollar figure translated into stock, or what?

      You sir, are looking a gift horse in the mouth. Not considered good form.

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    3. Re:HOW MANY shares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Good question. The contest is modelled on the standard "how many jellybeans in a jar", where the traditional prize for being closest to the correct number is the jar full of jellybeans itself. Thus the reward is the total number of shares available in Google. Seems worth a guess anyway.

  10. First and Last by stecoop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The person that comes closest to estimating the opening and closing

    You mean the person that guess the first buying bid of the day and the price of the last buying bid of the day... I bet the first one will be higher than the last one. I like the 20 - 80 from the first poster but has it backwards. I bet its 80 and 20.

    1. Re:First and Last by atheken · · Score: 2, Funny

      My GUESS...

      more like $80 opening, $40 closing by the end of the first week of Google trading, mid $20s, where it will stablize.. Or, if we geeks have anything to say about it... $60.22 (think about it...) or $31.415 (decimals shifted to adjust to a possible real world value of G00G stock.) This is like a dotcom, but they have been "developing" for a bit longer, so they might not crash 'n burn maybe.

  11. The real object of the game... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Informative

    The contest entry form has some interesting subtexts to them...
    3. Do you intend to place a bid for shares in the Google IPO? (Yes/No)
    4. What price will you bid for Google shares? Enter 0 if you do not intend to bid. The value must be between 0 and 999, inclusive.
    5. How many shares do you intend to bid for at this price?
    Enter 0 if you do not intend to bid

    There's the true motivation for this exercise. The person running this contest clearly states on his site that he's going to try to sell the results of the survey to people who want to have some way of peering into a crystal ball and determining what people would be willing to pay for Google before the dutch auction price is determined.

    The day-trader investors who ususually love IPOs hate this Dutch Auction system because it gives them less room to try to buy up the early shares and then sell them the same day to people who wished they had gotten in on the IPO and are now willing to pay more to get their shares at market prices. (Smarter investors would place a limit order rather than a market order and just wait for the day-one spike to wear off and the price to be more in line with reality.)

    11. Would you like to be contacted by someone to help you bid for shares in the Google IPO? You will receive one email if you say Yes. (Yes/No)
    Talk about "highly targetted e-mail marketing list." That's sure to go to the highest bidder too...

    This guy most certainly has a right to make a buck... we just should be smart enough consumers to realize that he's doing so by running this, and possibly withhold our information if we deem it too valuable to hand over.

    1. Re:The real object of the game... by Golgafrinchan · · Score: 0
      The day-trader investors who ususually love IPOs hate this Dutch Auction system because it gives them less room to try to buy up the early shares and then sell them the same day to people who wished they had gotten in on the IPO and are now willing to pay more to get their shares at market prices.

      Your average Joe Daytrader cannot do this. The only people who are able to get shares during the immediate beginning of an IPO are insiders, investment banks, friends of the company, etc.

      --
      My userid is prime!
    2. Re:The real object of the game... by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your average Joe Daytrader cannot do this. The only people who are able to get shares during the immediate beginning of an IPO are insiders, investment banks, friends of the company, etc.

      Joe Daytrader can't get in on the IPO itself, but he can sit and be the buyer shortly after the bell when first one of the "lucky few" decides to sell their shares, antispating that there will be a lot of Jane Investors calling their brokers later in the day wanting that "hot stock" and willing to pay more.

      It's not a certain play, but during IPO mania it worked far too many times for it to be healthy...

    3. Re:The real object of the game... by Sanity · · Score: 3, Interesting
      This guy most certainly has a right to make a buck...
      But should he be aided and abetted by Slashdot?

      Whatever you feel, slashdot is playing a significant role in giving this effort publicity - and, to be honest, I am forced to ask whether this is stretching the "News for nerds" thing a bit far; Sure, Google may use Linux, and they may have a clever search algorithm, but does that justify blow by blow coverage of their efforts to raise more capital?

    4. Re:The real object of the game... by paro12 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you're missing the point of a dutch auction. They don't care what people might be willing to pay. They start the price ridiculously high, and slowly bring it down until all of the shares are purchased. The price that the last share is purchased at is the price that everyone who has purchased a share gets the stock for. So this guy has little to gain by knowing what you would likely pay for it. The idea behind a dutch auction is to get people to panic that they're gonna miss out on a great deal and buy at a price where the stock is highly overvalued, making the company a boatload of money

  12. w00t by TheViciousOverWind · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Opening: $16.75
    Closing: $53.20


    Yes, I pulled those numbers out of my *ss, exactly as everyone else will.

    --
    My <1000 UID is with a hot chick
  13. marketing scam? by bigfatslob · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Does this seem like a pre-IPO buzz-generator to anyone -else-?

    Maybe I'm too cynical.

  14. Dutch Auctions by Kohonen · · Score: 1

    Why don't other companies also use auction systems to do IPOs? It seems like all of the big financial companies get basically free money for organizing the same thing

    1. Re:Dutch Auctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If g*d did not want IPO investors skinned, then he would not have made them ( greedy/fearful ) sheep. So sez a famous Amerikan.

    2. Re:Dutch Auctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      investors skinned... sheep

      Wouldn't that be "fleeced" not skinned, if you skin them, they are probably only good for one go-round.

  15. Abuse? by vondo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It looks to me like the only piece of info needed to register is an e-mail address. With people here capable of supplying thousands of e-mail addresses each, I think you're looking for abuse.

    1. Re:Abuse? by danharan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why should he care? He's just trying to figure out what a large number of people are willing to pay for Google shares, so he can game the auction.

      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    2. Re:Abuse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I submitted as abuse@gmail.com

    3. Re:Abuse? by AresTheImpaler · · Score: 1
      Why should he care? He's just trying to figure out what a large number of people are willing to pay for Google shares, so he can game the auction.

      The problem is that anyone could come up with thousands of figures instead of only one number they believe it is going to be the price. This would not help in getting some good statistic numbers.

    4. Re:Abuse? by danharan · · Score: 1
      The problem is that anyone could come up with thousands of figures instead of only one number they believe it is going to be the price. This would not help in getting some good statistic numbers.
      You'll still see a distinct pattern when you plot the data. Probably not a bell-curve, but if you know what kind of pattern to expect for this type of data, you can eliminate background noise fairly easily.
      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    5. Re:Abuse? by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Why should he care? He's just trying to figure out what a large number of people are willing to pay for Google shares, so he can game the auction.

      He should care, for I have the feeling that, even now, his feedback form is being flooded with bogus data.

  16. Mike Hawk's guess by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess the price will be somewhere near $250 per share on the day of the IPO and down around $1.94 about 4 years later. Be careful when investing in those tech stocks, you can get seriously burned. But this is just a guess, IANACPA or investment advisor. YMMV, void where prohibited.

    1. Re:Mike Hawk's guess by way2trivial · · Score: 3, Interesting
      wanna see somthing really weird?

      type in scox and hit compare

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    2. Re:Mike Hawk's guess by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 1

      HA! Nice. I wonder if the VA Software stock situation would improve if they knew that the investor relations link on the OSDN contact page is broken. Who is running this show anyways? Personally I'd fire all the website staff, but that's just me.

    3. Re:Mike Hawk's guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Type in MSFT and hit compare. heh

    4. Re:Mike Hawk's guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome, you'll be trolling at +2 again in no time!

  17. Hmm... by DiscordOfFive · · Score: 1

    Well, this could show what people value google at... or more precisely, how profitable investors think it is. Either way, I'm holding my cards. This isn't a stock I'm gonna buy. I'm not into world domination.

    --


    Only the purest of souls seek enlightenment. Everyone else just wants power.
  18. Dutch by JeffSh · · Score: 1

    we need one more story mentioning some form of dutch for the trifecta.

    how often does that happen.

    1. Re:Dutch by softspokenrevolution · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about a Dutch oven...

    2. Re:Dutch by OracleOfTangent · · Score: 1

      Looks like you got your wish, then. mklencke writes "I'm part of a project that is developing a small neighborhood of about 30 houses in the Netherlands ...

  19. Dear Slashdot by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a get rich quick scheme and I need your help. Those helping me can be at the bottom of my pyramid scheme, and will get millions of dollars, 3" of wang and all the heart meds you can count with a Cray. Just invoke my ip and I will make you a nigerian just for clicking. I promise....really

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    1. Re:Dear Slashdot by Hard_Code · · Score: 2, Funny

      Excellent. I happen to be a member of a board of a charitable foundation which invests in pyramid schemes. Please, sir, kindly send me a picture of your crew with miniature bridge sculptures balanced on their heads (this is important as it will show proof to the Troll Charitable Donation Foundation of your commitment), and I will wire the money as soon as possible!

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    2. Re:Dear Slashdot by austad · · Score: 1

      Your ideas are interesting. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
  20. My Guess by DrLudicrous · · Score: 1

    Opens at $23.50, closes at $67.38.

    1. Re:My Guess by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      Opens at $23.50, closes at $67.38.

      You forget the all important "a little over $1 a share after 6 months, about to be delisted."

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:My Guess by benna · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why everyone seems to think the price will go up on the first day. The auction is designed so the that initial price is as high as people are willing to pay. This means that the price can only go down at least in the short term.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    3. Re:My Guess by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1
      The auction is designed so the that initial price is as high as people are willing to pay.

      Not necessarily. There is also an incentive to try to get the stock as cheaply as possible, meaning that people will bid the price they *hope* to pay for the stock. Once the auction is completed, I am sure that there will be many out there who bid too low in the hopes that their orders would be covered, but who are willing to buy a lesser number of shares for a higher price in order not to be locked out of this "golden opportunity".

      --
      That is all.
  21. Mind your timestamps children.... by DoraLives · · Score: 1

    I've got first dubs on $37.11 to open and $103.33 to close. Best of luck and may the best guesser win.

    --
    Is it fascism yet?
  22. Google = genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great, let the people decide the stock prices. That way I'm sure Google stock will start out way overpriced.. giving the employee shareholders a grab at an awful lot of dough. After all, everybody loves Google. People have a tendency to use their emotions instead of logic to make purchases. The question is, will Google make money to stay afloat?

    1. Re:Google = genius by edgedmurasame · · Score: 1

      That appears to be very doubtful, since Google is quite outnumbered by equally intelligent members of the public who do this kind of stuff for a living. Sure, they might get some of it, but this would almost be shooting themselves in their feet if they assumed this. They might be #1 in a lot of books, but they arent in mine. Their strength might be from the Stanford background of the company, but that could be used against them as the lack of transparency in their company policy could hurt them later on.

      --
      "Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
    2. Re:Google = genius by gilroy · · Score: 1
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Great, let the people decide the stock prices.

      Um, long term, isn't that what "the market" is? What's wrong with allowing market forces to come into play earlier than usual? Other than preventing early bidders from reaping unsustainable and unjustified rewards...
    3. Re:Google = genius by s.fontinalis · · Score: 1

      Not to mention maximising the profit for Google. Every company who's stock traded higher that their IPO price the day of the IPO LOST an oppurtunity to make more money from the IPO (roughly float* difference (Day High - IPO)). Why shouldn't a company maximise the benefit of an IPO?

    4. Re:Google = genius by RedWizzard · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The question is, will Google make money to stay afloat?
      Google make plenty of money now. They made about $100M profit last year on revenue of nearly $1B. There is no reason to expect that to drop after the IPO. The real question is will Google's profits match the expectations generated by their share price?
    5. Re:Google = genius by conway · · Score: 1

      Employees of a company going public usually have a lockout period in which they cannot excercise any shares. I doubt google employees (or even founders) would be able to offload their shares in the first month, let alone the first day.

    6. Re:Google = genius by iabervon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The idea is that stock prices tend to start out unreasonably low (due to the price being set by people who agree with each other to get a good deal on the stock), shoot up towards the market valuation, and then go higher on momentum and speculation. Then they drop back towards the market valuation when the novelty subsides.

      Google's idea is to arrange for the stock to start at the market valuation, such that it will probably stay flat after the IPO. Since the system is engineered to prevent a bubble, it discourages speculation.

      The point is really to become public with the minimum of volitility. They have to follow most of the rules for a public company anyway, so they might as well actually be publically traded, if for no other reason than to let their major stockholders diversify.

    7. Re:Google = genius by mosschops · · Score: 1

      People have a tendency to use their emotions instead of logic to make purchases.

      Shhhhhhh! My eBay bidders might hear you!

  23. Guaranteed skew up by shoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The method of awarding a fixed number of shares (ten) in this contest guarantees that it will skew upwards the price of the stock.

    If you made the choice of betting on $1, you would get $10 worth of stock. If you made the choice of betting on $200, you'd get $2000 worth of stock.

    Now obviously you don't want to bet too high because if you do then you won't be right at all. But you will tend to bet on the high end, rather than the low end.

    P.S. Everything I know about Economics I learned from The Price Is Right.

    1. Re:Guaranteed skew up by kookbox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You think the fixed number of shares being awarded in this look-like-a-scam-walks-like-a-scam contest will raise the price of the stock in the real-life Dutch auction? That's asinine.

      Like I learned from Echelon, the map is not the territory.

    2. Re:Guaranteed skew up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you made the choice of betting on $1, you would get $10 worth of stock. If you made the choice of betting on $200, you'd get $2000 worth of stock.

      More likely, the 2000 people who 'bet' on $200 will split the 10 shares and each walk off with a cool $1. Maybe minus $5 S&H.

    3. Re:Guaranteed skew up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's not what he said, idiot. the reward for winning the guessing contest is a monotonically increasing function of the actual price. For two prices x and x+.01, if I don't think x is more likely to occur than x+.01, then I should choose x+.01 as my guess, because the reward is greater.

  24. According to Wikipedia estimates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Google will have an IPO value of $100!

  25. my guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $18.24 opening, $42.81 closing ;)

  26. Higher price by bobthemuse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder if the initial price will end up higher than this system was designed to determine.

    From my understanding, people bid on it at any price point. When they decide to create X shares, the top bidders will receive those shares, but will pay the price point of the lowest bidder. If this is true, what's to stop me from bidding $500/share to guarantee I get to take part in the IPO? Since I won't have to pay this price, and I probably won't increase the per-share price significantly, an individual doing this could easily be guaranteed as many shares as they like. What happens when a large number of people realize this and it artificially increases the price?

    Is there something to prevent this? Is this a desired action (maybe from Google's perspective)? Or am I just completely missing something here....?

    1. Re:Higher price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If what you say is true, only the richest bidders will be able to buy significant shares at such high prices. Average Joe will not be able to bid 1000 shares at 500 dollars.

    2. Re:Higher price by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Informative

      What happens when a large number of people realize this and it artificially increases the price?

      If too many people bid $500/share... then the cutoff price will turn out being something like $400/share, which will likely be artificially high considering the true value of Google.

      You'll pay $400/share to get a ton of shares, but then only be able to sell them at their true value which the market will quickly realize is in the sub-$100s. What a way to lose 3/4 of your money!

      That's the key of this Dutch Auction system. Instead of the lucky few with the right connections getting a pre-market chance to buy at a lower-than-fair-value price, this takes a stab at determining the fair value before the first shares are distributed. If too many people try to drive the IPO price upwards, everyone will find themselves holding shares that they'll only be able to sell at a loss.

      The "I'm smarter-than-you, so I can make a quick buck off this..." gang is really better off sitting this one out.

    3. Re:Higher price by smallpaul · · Score: 4, Informative
      Let's say that the absolute maximum price you are willing to pay is $100/share. What is the incentive to bid a penny higher? Of course you could big much higher just to "guarantee" that you get stock but the goal is not to guarantee that you get stock. The goal is to get stock at a price that makes that stock a good investment. If you bid $500.00 and actually pay $100.00 when you believed that the stok was only a good investment at $60.00 then you are out $40.00 bucks. You should have bid $60.00.

      Imagine that you did bid $60.00. Maybe other people will get stock and you won't, but if you believe that they are overpaying then from your point of view they are suckers, not winners. Remember that the goal of the game is not to get Google stock. It is to PROFIT from owning Google stock. If you bid high and get the stock and then watch it slide downward for years after you have lost, not won.

    4. Re:Higher price by G4from128k · · Score: 1

      what's to stop me from bidding $500/share to guarantee I get to take part in the IPO?

      Your fear that everyone else will bid $501, that the auction will settle at $500, and that you will end up payng $500 per share. Although it is true that a single person can submit a high bid to "ensure" getting some shares, the extending this strategy to n-players changes the game. In the end, people reallize that the most sensible strategy is to bid what they really think the shares are worth. Bidding any higher than that increases the chance of getting over-valued shares and losing money.

      How much would you bid in a Dutch auction for a $20 bill?

      But, you are right that this auction will bid up the price because people are not rational -- they tend to be more confident than they should be and they like to "win".

      --
      Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    5. Re:Higher price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misunderstand. You don't pay the price of the lowest bidder. You pay for the lowest *successful* bidder.

      So if you can only afford $20/share but bid $500/share, and a zillion of other people bid $400/share then you're stuck paying $400/share, even if other people also bid $20/share.

      Basically you should only bid what you can afford to pay. You won't be forced to pay more, but you can pay less.

      (You might be able to put in multiple bids, 100s @ $10/s + 100s @ $20/s to get more shares for your money if the price is below $10, but I'm not sure of the rules)

    6. Re:Higher price by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1

      If this is true, what's to stop me from bidding $500/share to guarantee I get to take part in the IPO?

      Nothing, other than if enough other people think the same way you really will end up paying that amount - this may go on to answer your other question "What happens when a large number of people realize this and it artificially increases the price?" And the price (last, mid, bid/ask weighted thickness) will collapse as there are no others to maintain the bid side.

    7. Re:Higher price by DaoudaW · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Huh!!!???

      The IPO clearly states that Google has the right to reject any bid. They specifically say that if they determine that someone is not bidding in good faith--such as submitting a ridiculously high bid--that they won't accept that bid.

      The other problem with your $500 bid is that if a significant number of other bidder think the same as you, you've just bought yourself a $500 stock. Are you willing to take that risk?

    8. Re:Higher price by JPS · · Score: 1

      Well, if you bid $500, this means you are willing to pay up to $500. Period. You might end up paying these, or lower. In a regular auction, you start with a small bet an increase till (a) you have what you want or (b) you have reached your maximum price. In a Dutch auction, you give your maximum price right away, and you will pay the price of the highest bidder among the people who bid too low to have shares.

      Psychological factors aside, a Dutch auction is giving exactly the same results as a regular auction but in only one round.

      So if a lot of people bet $500, yes, the price could possibly be as much as $500, or at least increase, as the highest bid of the "losers" will be higher.

      So well, this is desired: if a lot of people indicate that they are willing to put as much as $500, it makes perfect sense that the price increases...

    9. Re:Higher price by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      Well, as you must be able to pay what you bid, go ahead and bid as high as you want. But if you have $5,000 you'll only be able to bid for 1 share at $5,000, 10 shares at $500, 20 at $250, or 40 at $125. You'll want as many shares as you can. So those playing the high-price game will affect a small number of shares.

    10. Re:Higher price by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      But, you are right that this auction will bid up the price because people are not rational -- they tend to be more confident than they should be and they like to "win".

      If that's what you truely expect to happen, then you should bid what you think a Google share is really worth, and if you "lose" the dutch auction, place a limit order to buy the shares when they fall to the price you wanted. If you're right, the Dutch Auction will end up settling at an overvalued price, but then when the "winners" start placing sell orders they'll end up losers. If you're wrong, all you lose is the fee your broker charges for placing a limit order that never goes through.

    11. Re:Higher price by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      ..because what's to stop everyone from doing that and end up paying then..?

      i'm not familiar with the dutch system mentioned but i'd figure it be something used on tulip sales and so on maybe ?-) that would make some sense at least anyways and they probably have pretty well smoothed the system at the thousands and thousands of 'em held...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:Higher price by fred911 · · Score: 1

      The bidding process is set up so they can test the markets pricing. The IPO pricing will be determined by the offers and the underwriters. not by the bidding process. In order to get allocated IPO shares, you need to place a bid. I beleive what they are trying to do is price it as to what the market thinks its worth BEFORE offering it on the exchange. Their hope is to stop the "feeding frenzy" that has happened in the past.

      Read more here:
      http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/29/business/ 29GOOGL EAUTCION.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5070&en=cc9c8f43f4a0 67cd&ex=1084852800&adxnnl=0&adxnnlx=1084748480-g7+ y2GJ0J6bZz5m/a8SL+Q

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    13. Re:Higher price by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      ...when you believed that the stok was only a good investment

      As if `investors' will be involved with the stock at the IPO. The only folks who will be buying/selling these things are gamblers (day-traders). Most investors will wait for a while (like maybe a year, or a few) for the price to settle down a bit...

      To paraphrase Dogbert: `Fools shouldn't have money.' So let them all buy Google at $100 and get burned... :-)

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    14. Re:Higher price by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      The "I'm smarter-than-you, so I can make a quick buck off this..." gang is really better off sitting this one out.

      Or bidding at a sane price level.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    15. Re:Higher price by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1

      Thank you smallpaul. Your comment was very lucid. It's amazing that people would think any differently than what you described... but then that must be what drives P/E ratios so high on stupid companies (AMZN, ...)

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
  27. Obviously... by HedonismBot · · Score: 4, Funny

    The answer is $42. 42 is always the answer.

    --
    Sailors. Oh man!
    1. Re:Obviously... by synthparadox · · Score: 1

      I would laugh my ass off if it ended up being $42. While we're on the subject, thats actually what I guessed, $25 open and $42 close.

  28. I think the real question is... by chrispyman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    does this person really think that getting wild guesses from thousands of non-investor types will help him determine anything?

    1. Re:I think the real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because not everyone participating would necessarily be a "non-investor"?

      I hope to get some Google stock whenever we finally are able to...

    2. Re:I think the real question is... by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1
      ...does this person really think that getting wild guesses from thousands of non-investor types will help him determine anything?

      Probably. All those same non-investor types will be the people placing bids on small lots of shares. I will be surprised if the auction does NOT result in some overpriced shares.

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
  29. Re:NOT A SCAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I f0rw4rd3d it t0 all my fr13ndz, aNd now 1'M a multi-B4ZZZZ1L10NAIRE!!!

    Then why don't you go sit on your yacht and shut the fuck up instead of posting here?

  30. Prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Opening Price: 75cents

    MiddayHigh: 150 dollars.

    Closing Price: 25 cents.

  31. For my 2 shares I guess... by rufusdufus · · Score: 1

    $30.00 -> $42.02

  32. Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Opening: eleventy-billion
    Closing: $Texas

  33. I sell you secrets! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Send $2.7 million my specal escrow service and I send you full story about Google IPO. Hurry now important very!

  34. good guess by gnuLNX · · Score: 1

    50.23 open
    55.5 close

    --
    what?
  35. Who? by CGP314 · · Score: 1

    I'm interested in how well the public can estimate this demand and the price of the shares to be offered.

    He speaks as though 'the public' is a different kind of public from the one that will be bidding on the shares. Gee, I wonder what use he could possibly have for getting a sampling ahead of time...


    -Colin

  36. Great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Great idea! And you're a great guy!

    I'm going to send you my 19 day old P-P-P-Powerbook as thanks!

    -Jeff

  37. dutch auction effect by shibut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given the large amount of publicity Google's IPO is getting, and assuming the dutch auction will be pretty open to the public (I trust Google for that), the whole point of the dutch auction is to dampen the first day effect and make sure the company, and not day traders, gets most of the upside the market is willing to give it. Notice the assumptions up top, though... Theory doesn't always translate into real life.

    And another thing: read the prospectus: the wall st guys are still getting a pretty good cut!

    1. Re:dutch auction effect by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1
      you are wrong. I have studied quantitative finance and I have never heard of the term "dutch auction effect". A google search doesn't return anything either... although google might be _censoring_ it until after the IPO :-)

      The dutch auction had nothing to do with who captures the upside (besides google).

      1 -- Winners' Curse means that everybody who bids and wins shares of google will have overestimated the value of google. Institutional investors have more resources and can more accurately value companies than individual investors. Thus, institutional investors will be less likely to overvalue the company, and less likely to obtain large blocks of shares.

      2 -- Dutch Auction keeps out institutional investors for another reason: They don't get blocks of shares at an early price set by the underwriter. They have to bid on shares just like everybody else.

      Google doesn't care who buys it's shares. They are lower class shares with almost no voting rights. All google's current share holders want is the highest $$$ for the shares as of issuance. Dutch auction (via winners' curse) assures this.

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
  38. im taking this seriously... by Dragoonkain · · Score: 0

    Google shares are going to be gold, so even if I give my modest guess $41.50-$41.55 for the open price :) now im gonna pray.

  39. well, that was fun by zogger · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I entered at the site, easy enough to do. Big fun, see what happens.

    almost as much fun as google bombing for the best place to shop for nigritude ultramarine, the breakfast of champions

  40. NO, IT'S JUST... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that you're a troll and everyone can check your posting history of failed "pfirst psots" to verify.

  41. WAG's by MrIrwin · · Score: 1
    Look at the SCOX message board on Yahoo finance. They call guessing the next days closing price a WAG - Wild Arse Guess.


    With SCOX stock (SCO groups ticker symbol) it has become a kind of sport ;-)

    --

    And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)

    1. Re:WAG's by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      Sir, I take exception to that. Some of us use SWAG for things like this.

      That's a Scientific Wild Assed Guess.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  42. Ahh, spam has made it's way onto Slashdot news! by Kerhop · · Score: 1

    http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/10/technology/google_ scam/?cnn=yes

    At least the offer is for free shares instead of trying to con billions from us. :)

  43. No, much higher by Adolph_Hitler · · Score: 1


    I think between $300-320 a share.

    --
    People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
  44. futures market by sybert · · Score: 2, Informative
    If you want to get good information on the expected IPO price than you should run a futures market on the opening and closing prices.

    tradesports.com has a futures market on the relative price of the IPO. There is another futures market for the time of the IPO

  45. Can we guess more than once? by Three+Headed+Man · · Score: 1
    $47.30

    Not like I need to be rich anyway.

    --
    I'm probably at the karma cap. Mod up a funny troll instead, it lightens the mood :)
  46. My Bet by HeLLFiRe1151 · · Score: 1

    116.42

    --
    I've got 101 mod points and you can't have them!
  47. ipofinancial.com has a report for sale by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 1

    As long as we're pitching services, :)

    IPOFinancial.com is offering a Google IPO report for sale. It's a reasonable price if anyone is considering actually investing in Google's IPO. As many others have said already, the dutch auction system will put a spin on this which not many high profile IPOs have had (at least recently).

  48. Why? (was Re: my guess) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Open: $21
    Close: $14

    I don't see why the price shoul be going up.

    what value does goole have to offer?
    divindend?
    just let us know..

  49. "you are out $40.00 bucks" by JessLeah · · Score: 1

    ...You are out forty dollars bucks? Department of redundancy department?

  50. what the heck by bigattichouse · · Score: 1

    opening 25.00 closing 73.95

    --
    meh
    1. Re:what the heck by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      opening 25.00 closing 73.95

      If there are that many people willing to pay 73.95 for a share of Google such that at the end of the day that's the lowest price at which a share can be had, then just how in your universe did the Dutch Auction settle at 25?

      Try filping the closing an opening signs and you might be on to something. Google's more likely to crash downward than rocket upward on day one thanks to the Dutch Auction.

  51. The range will be small, and downwards by mveloso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One thing I've noticed about the posters is they're not really sure why the dutch auction format is different than the normal IPO process.

    In a normal IPO, the investment bank (or brokerage) sets the price, say, $20, then buys the shares off of the issuing company for $20. Any spread off of that goes directly to the brokerage (or investment bank).

    This is a Bad Deal for the issuing company, because the spread should have gone to the company, not to the brokerage. Think about it: if MSDW priced a stock at $20, but were able to sell at $200, then the issuing company just lost $180! The brokerage, of course, made $180.

    With the dutch auction, there will (or should be) little or no upside to google's stock because the price will be determined by how much people are willing to pay up front. In fact, it will probably drop on the first day, since people confused by this concept will try and flip, leading to a sell imbalance.

    Depending on the shares that are to be issued, I'd say that conservatively google's stock should open at anywhere from $175 +- 8%, and drop about 15%. Why $175? Because -everyone- knows google, and companies that are well-known to the public trade at a premium.

    The other interesting thing about google is that a savvy investor/hacker could manipulate the earnings by writing a virus that sneakily clicked on all those google ads that appear when you do a google search. Voila, instant earnings! With enough spread, you could do millions of hits a day, which translates to millions of dollars a day (thank you, adwords!)

    We'll see.

  52. Danger Will Robinson Danger! by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

    If you live in the United States, DO NOT accept this wager. It is a violation of Securities and Exchange Commission rules to gamble on the price of stocks, except by investing in them.

    1. Re:Danger Will Robinson Danger! by Strenoth · · Score: 1

      but it's not a wager. Awaer requires that you invest something with monetary value. this is a guessin competition, with the winner getting a prize. no one in the competition has anything to loose.

      --

      "It takes a very long time to count to 2 in binary." ~'Fourlegged'

  53. You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by mveloso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just realized - he's doing a bayesian average!

    http://www.research.att.com/~volinsky/bma.html

    There was a possibly apochryphal story about this. A plane went down in a large area, and they needed to find it. Nobody really knew what happened to it. The leader of the search team went and asked a bunch of pilots where they thought the plane was, after giving them the course, heading, speed, and whatever data was available.

    Well, they took the answers, narrowed the search area, then found the plane pretty much where the consensus said it would be.

    A bit of thought will give you the reason this might have worked...

    1. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by Da+Fokka · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is there any reason to assume that the average consesus also is the expected value of the stock?

      First of all, most people who enter the contest won't be experts like the pilots of your example.

      And next to that, even if they were there still could be situations where this approach would not work. Let's consider the plane example: If there were to probable routes A and B, some experts will choose a crash site along route A and others will choose a crash site along route B. The average of these guesses will be somewhere between routes A and B, on a highly improbable route.

      I'm not saying this guy won't get useful data out of this game. Au contraire, I think it's a smart idea. But I'm not sure whether using the data in the way you suggested to calculate the stock value will yield a reliable estimate.

    2. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by cheese_wallet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "First of all, most people who enter the contest won't be experts like the pilots of your example."

      experts don't determine prices in the stock market. The irrational public does.

    3. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      They don't have to be experts; they need to be statistically significant to the outcome.

      The original pilot went down where other pilots would have gone down.

      People on slashdot will end up bidding the price the average person on slashdot would end up paying.

      If the person's assumptions are good; that the average bidder on the shares will in the end be statistically comparable to the average slashdotter, then he's got it right.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    4. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      experts don't determine prices in the stock market. The irrational public does.

      I have absolutely no numbers to back this up (and I'm too lazy to look), but I highly suspect that institutional and fund investors outnumber low-skill private investors on daily volume by a ratio of at least 100:1. It seems that for every Joe Average flipping a couple of shares in a couple of companies, there are hundreds of massive institution investors and fund managers flipping billions of shares.

      I am, of course, talking about real companies with a real market, and not penny stock where only the low-skill investor is involved.

    5. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1
      a bayesian average won't work in the case of google auction due to winners' curse. Winners' curse states that the winners of the auctions are the people who mis-estimated the value of the stock.

      It's works best for google which is why they are holding a dutch auction. Winners' curse means they will earn more $$$ per share than what would have happened with a more traditional IPO route.

      Of course, nothing is stopping ~volinsky from applying a winners' curse adjustment to his average. I didn't read the link, so he may, in fact, be doing just that.

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
    6. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      First of all, most people who enter the contest won't be experts like the pilots of your example.

      You mean, the people entering this contest will be the unwashed masses, pretty much like who'll actually be bidding on the Google IPO?

      I think you may be on to something!

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    7. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by enronman · · Score: 1

      Of those that invest, very few indivual investors buy stocks directly without a financial advisor. Experts i.e brokers recomending or reviewing orders or mutual fund managers drive most investment decisions. That and only irrational investors with MONEY set stock prices, and while the public at large is irrational those who have money in their hands on average are more rational.

    8. Re:You know, he's doing a bayesian survey by khallow · · Score: 1
      There was a possibly apochryphal story about this. A plane went down in a large area, and they needed to find it. Nobody really knew what happened to it. The leader of the search team went and asked a bunch of pilots where they thought the plane was, after giving them the course, heading, speed, and whatever data was available.

      Actually, as I understand it, there supposedly is a story in "Blind Man's Bluff" about locating a lost nuclear submarine (which the Soviets were also searching for). At one point, the book alleges they set up a betting pool for the location. The results were ignored, but the object turned out to be very close to the predicted location (ie, measured in feet not miles).

      Other people on slashdot have compared this betting market approach to Bayesian methods before. Betting markets are more accurate due to the addition of risk. For example, the "Google Swami" above only takes the last guess of the person. There's no incentive there to make early guesses and revise them as the deadline looms since only the last one counts. I only get rewarded if I make a very close to correct guess which I could do right before the market closes. If I make a good, informative guess now, I should get a better reward than making a almost correct guess much later on.

  54. Guesses by mwolthuis · · Score: 1

    open 31.78 close 26.53

  55. OMFG ... read this..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  56. sounds like a scam.... by axonal · · Score: 2, Funny

    Dear Sir. Your contact information was referred to me by one of my trusted contacts, whose name I am not at liberty to compromize. I would like to approach you with reguards to a profitable Business Proposal, reguarding the transfer of TEN MILLION SHARES OF GOOGLE STOCK. For reasons I am sure you will appreciate, I ask that you keep this commucation confidential, and avoid it falling into the hands of any agents of the Nigerian Secret Police that may be operating in Your area. My name is Mabwano DeLacroix, and I am the Son of Sir LARRY PAGE, the recently Removed from Power Chairman of GOOGLE. If you have been following the events on Slashdot over the last few years, you will remember the big scandal that took place when Sir PAGE was imprisoned for alleged crimes against SCO without standing a trial.

  57. The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 5, Funny

    I submitted this a while back, and it was predictably rejected, but if you really care about the Google IPO, take a gander at this article:
    The Bear's Lair: The Google gross-out
    Martin Hutchinson
    UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
    May 5, 2005

    ...This is all just an everyday story of tech company greed, of course -- it makes you pity the poor fools who buy the issue on a $25 billion valuation (unless they're lucky enough to sell out fast to even greater -- and soon poorer -- fools.) Of course, their chances of selling out for a quick profit, usually pretty good in a tech sector IPO, are negated in this one because Google has chosen to throw out nearly 300 years of equity market wisdom (the South Sea Bubble share issues in 1720 were done the Wall Street way, and not Google's way) and offer shares by means of a "Dutch auction"...

    Indeed, there's something uniquely unpleasant in the hippie rhetoric with which Google surrounds its activities. "We aspire to make Google an institution that makes the world a better place" we are told in the early part of the S-1 statement (the only part that many journalists appear to have read!) "Google is not a conventional company" ... and, in an inspired moment of Bill-and-Ted-speak "Don't be evil.."

    http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040505-1 14352-5040r.htm

    1. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by John+Hurliman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Amortizing stock options expense is a hot debate right now, and the author of the Washington Times article makes it pretty clear which side he is on. While he may not agree with the current methodology, Google is in full compliance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board Statement 123. More information on the debate here:

      http://www.webcpa.com/AccountingToday/index.cfm/tx tFuse/dspShellContent/fuseAction/DISPLAY/numConten tID/52221/numSiteID/7/numTaxonomyTypeID/10/numTaxo nomyID/200.htm

    2. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all that definitely tells you something unpleasant about the Washington Times. But alas, not uniquely so.

    3. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by Baumi · · Score: 1

      He starts out with good points, but once he gets going with his "death of the internet"-scenario it's downhill:

      Far from becoming easier and quicker to use, it is becoming slower and more difficult as the tsunami of viruses, spam and pop-ups infest all interactions with it
      [...]
      "Broadband" too, touted by President George W. Bush as an essential tool of technological advance for U.S. society as a whole, is becoming exponentially more sluggish, as the detritus clogs its arteries. Thus a consumer broadband Internet user of 2004 may experience Internet usage substantially slower than did a dial-up user of 1997, before pop-ups, spam and viruses became so universal.

      It's possible that a solution will be found to the virus/spam/popup problem before it gets very much worse, and the Internet will continue to be an essential information artery into the homes of America. It is also however possible that such a solution will not be found
      [...]
      Large companies will move to an Intranet, in which information sources are purchased from third parties and kept in an in-house system, safe from outside attack. Home users and small businesses [...] will stop [using the internet], relying on DVDs and CD-ROMs for the information and entertainment they need. If this begins to happen even to a small extent then the "network effect" on which the Internet depends may go into reverse, as the "early adopters" become early un-adopters, and a readily available e-mail address becomes like a telephone number in the local directory, something that the truly cool don't have.


      Obviously, the author doesn't even know there's more to the net than WWW and mail, nor has he heard about pop-up blockers or alternative operating systems. He might have a point on the spam problem, however Bayesian filtering seems to hold up pretty well for the time being.

      Apparently everyone who knows how to fire up Outlook and IE has enough expertise to predict future development of the internet. (Interestingly enough, he doesn't even mention the possibilty of people or companies swiching from the virus-ridden Windows to Linux or OS X, and what that might do to Microsoft's stock.)

    4. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by pr1000 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      I can't comment about the general gist of the article, but the sentiment below is not surprising when you consider that the Washington Post is owned by the Moonies and is considered by many to be on the lunatic right-wing fringe. Of course, this article is originally from UPI, but still, you might want to take it with a grain of salt.
      Indeed, there's something uniquely unpleasant in the hippie rhetoric with which Google surrounds its activities. "We aspire to make Google an institution that makes the world a better place" we are told in the early part of the S-1 statement (the only part that many journalists appear to have read!) "Google is not a conventional company" ... and, in an inspired moment of Bill-and-Ted-speak "Don't be evil.."
    5. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by packeteer · · Score: 1

      From the article you linked to:

      Thus a consumer broadband Internet user of 2004 may experience Internet usage substantially slower than did a dial-up user of 1997, before pop-ups, spam and viruses became so universal.

      It is also however possible that such a solution will not be found, so that the quality of Internet communication continues to deteriorate, and its costs to increase.

      Home users and small businesses, in such a case, may find that using the Internet becomes simply unproductive, at which point, with relatively little damage to their lifestyle, they will stop doing so, relying on DVDs and CD-ROMs for the information and entertainment they need.

      So basically this guy is saying the internet is on its way out and so is google. I think this guy just doesn't WANT tech IPO's to work.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    6. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only people who are against google's method of pricing, and selling, their IPO are those who benefitted from the old (ok, still current), hideously corrupt system. With google's approach (and a couple of other companies that did the OpenIPO thing back during the bubble) the favoritism and "old boy's club" method of handing out IPO shares to people who would "flip" them the same day for huge gains with little to no risk is eliminated.

      Like most things in this world, I'm sure that this approach is not completely equalitarian but it is sure a damn sight better than the current scum-bags-r-us method endorsed by all the big players (aka thieves).

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try Washington Times, not Washington Post.

    8. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by daniel_mcl · · Score: 1

      From the article:

      "More sinister, it is now becoming clear that virus and spam producers are working in cahoots with at least some of the spam filter makers, so that consumers are forced into a Mafia-style protection racket in which you have to buy the filters in order to have even reasonably satisfactory use of the Internet."

      I haven't heard *anything* about this. Since it's in the article I'd assume that it's to some extent true -- i.e. some obscure company was founded by spammers to block their particular manner of spam, but it that if this were really a serious issue I'd be hearing a lot more about it. Further, the plausibility of this is almost zero; it assumes the following:

      (1) All spam providers are unified into one large, mafia-type body.

      (2) They've either designed their spam in a manner that an algorithm can detect, or they publish some secret list of domains or addresses that send out only spam.

      Causing me to take the article with a large chunk of salt is that the column is written by the author of a book entitled "The Great Conservatives" which makes the following statement:

      "Conservatism, the philosophy of the great Tory governments of 1783-1830, was the driving force behind the rise [of Britain], it was the governing political idea during the triumph, and its abandonment was the principal cause of the decay."

      This simply confirms my perception that this author is a professional inflammatory writer, who puts more emphasis on making outlandish statements than on maintaining any connection with reality. This well correlates with his assertion that the internet is "slower and harder to use" since 1997 and that it will eventually fall by the wayside, to be replaced with proprietary information sources licensed by large companies for their employees. Why people would listen to this man is beyond me.

      --
      I used to read Caltizzle. I was a lot cooler than you.
    9. Re:The un-PC point of view in re: Google IPO by Behrooz · · Score: 1

      Martin Hutchinson is the author of "Great Conservatives" (Academica Press, June 2004) -- details can be found on the Web site greatconservatives.com

      I think that a man with these stellar conservative qualifications couldn't possibly be a thief-apologist. I'm certain that his objections to the dutch-auction system are entirely altruistic in nature, and that he is solely concerned with the protection of un-educated investors.

      --
      "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  58. wow, a new contest,, and all i do is give my email by jdkane · · Score: 1
    Hey guys, I got this great contest going. Just visit my page and you could win free Google stock if you enter your email address.

    Actual excerpt from the rules: (Note that I'll never share your personal information with anyone, without exeption). I'll give the aggregated information away for educational use and other worthy causes. Email me.

  59. Google == Bad Investment == Stacked Deck by hwstar · · Score: 1

    Did you know that there are 2 classes of shares and
    the series management holds gets 10x the voting rights of the shares being auctioned off.

    Management gets to do what it wishes-- shareholders be damned.

    I don't know about you, but this analogous to being handcuffed in the back of a police car.

    I wouldn't touch this with a 1 parsec pole.

  60. Next stor ies by jdkane · · Score: 3, Funny
    Possible follow-up stories on Slashdot ...

    1. An unprecendented number of Slashdot geeks have started receiving massive amounts of spam after signing up for free Google shares. The email-harvesting www.googleiposwami.co seemed to be endorsed by /. editors by way of posting the article.

    2. And in other /. news ... /. editors use spam techniques to make money from their subscriber base. CowboyNeal could not be reached at his new off-shore resort for comment.

  61. not operated by Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the front page of the article:
    "This site is not operated by Google."

    Someone's trying to make money off of Google's IPO!

  62. GIGO dept? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's GIGO?

    Google in, Google out?

  63. (My) 2 cents?? by bender_is_great · · Score: 1
    Not really. What do I know.

    I don't really know what they want to achieve with this experiment. What does the average slashdotter
    know about investing. I could be wrong however so...

    $43.03 opening.
    $63.04 closing.

  64. Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by ZuperDee · · Score: 3, Informative

    TIAA-Cref does not like Google's share structure, for example. In short, it sounds like they believe Google will not be worth as much unless they take steps to make the management more "accountable" to the public. (Interpret it however you want to.)

    1. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by hwstar · · Score: 1

      Precisely. This lopsided voting structure is the reason why I won't touch Google's stock.

    2. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      It's no more "lopsided" than any other "blue chip" company. There are actually very few of the blue chips that you, the public, can buy prefered stock in. Most of that stuff never hits the market...what you see on the market is mostly common, or non-voting, stock. It's the stuff employers like MS & McDonalds sell to employees and print when they want more money.

      Again, it's a nod to that the google guys are right on top of the game... Remember, Google doesn't NEED the money...they'd be perfectly happy being private but they have too many stock holders to remain private. So some stupid fed decided they HAD to open up and be public. So they are trying to make it as absolutely messy as possible so nobody would want to touch it on opening day!!! Also, being public lets the original VCs get their money out...They're the first to sell on opening day anyway so they're actually getting a better deal this way that the "traditional" IPO.

    3. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by Xenographic · · Score: 1

      I trust the founders. I don't trust those investors who are greedy. The complainers can stuff it, IMHO; no one has to buy so much as a share of it.

      Google would not be Google if it had to be a short-term thinking company like the street expects. On the street, a philosophy like Google's is seen as a liability, but it's the primary reason for me to want to buy a chunk and hold onto it long-term. The market can interpret that however it likes, however I intend to put my money where my mouth is; my investment being a vote of confidence in the leadership of Google.

      Even if they do eventually tank, I would rather have more companies be like Google, because I have no confidence in a great many of the other companies out there...

    4. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by hwstar · · Score: 1

      Something doesn't sound right in your statement above. Last time I checked, common stock HAS voting rights and that's what is usually distributed to the masses. Preferred stock usually doesn't have voting rights, but it is considered before common stock in the event of bankruptcy.

      As for your statement on non-voting stock, it seems to me you have it reversed. The general public DOES own most of the voting stock.

      As for employees doling out stock options, these are almost always common stock. Preferred stock is usually reserved for top management, and investors.

      You are right about Google's dilemma regarding going public. The feds say there are now too many minority shareholders and this is what is forcing them to do the IPO.

      What sticks in my craw is that me as an investor will not get the same per-share voting rights as an insider. Because of this I will not invest in Google. I can invest my money elsewhere without this kind of BS. Google and a few "media" companies are employing this tactic of lopsided voting rights to see if they can pull the wool over the eyes of the investing public. I conclude this gives management too much power. You implied that investors will force the company to do something "evil" and results-oriented? Do I want a laid-back management team responsible for ensuring I get a return on my investment when they know they can blatently ignore the interests of the shareholders?

      To me this sounds like whole IPO thing is bad for Google and bad for the new investors who buy Google stock.

    5. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, TIAA-Cref is a bloated organization that is run by committee. They are probably too stupid to understand that Google is maximizing for its current shareholders, not its future ones.

    6. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by david_reese · · Score: 1
      In short, it sounds like they believe Google will not be worth as much unless they take steps to make the management more "accountable" to the public.

      Hint: the article linked to above is NON-NEWS. Why?

      1. Google is using a auction based system to determine price, so if the investors think it's not worth much, they won't bid that high.
      2. Google is only doing this to satisfy regulations about private companies that make over a certain amount (and to reward employees).
      3. I trust Google more than TIAA-CREF...

      Google is gaming the system, basically. They are using an auction to make sure that only they (and their initial investors) get rich off their fame and hard work, and the non-control thing is to prevent the "market" from screwing them. Imagine if Microsoft got ahold of a large portion of the shares... Google knows it'd be doomed at that point.

    7. Re:Perhaps Google ought to consider this... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      but the only reason google is profitable is because they have a core team that sticks to their business and "to hell" with what wall street thinks.

      Notice how Steve Jobs has returned to Apple in much the same way. Sure he's got voting shareholders, but he "just knows" the business and makes a profit so they've learned to let him run his company and not micromanage it. Google is afraid of much the same thing. From reports being printed they are managing their money very "non-wall street" like in that they are double-counting costs and overhead to make sure they pay the bills.... The first thing many mutual funds would do is to make a "money grab" and either buy up needless companies or chase fools-errands trying to "get richer quick" neither of which is good for Google the company.

      I've worked at several places now that are only open because they followed "grandpa's business" rather than the showy wall street stuff. Particularly in this economy, it's good to keep money in the bank...I've seen my employers drop entire months worth of income on emergency repairs...but due to cautious accounting they could cover from cash rather than borrow from the bank...it's the difference between having a job and not.... The wall street "investors" are all about gambling anymore...not about the slow, steady growing of a business.

  65. Rational - but is this rational? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    What is the incentive to bid a penny higher? Of course you could big much higher just to "guarantee" that you get stock but the goal is not to guarantee that you get stock.

    Here you are thinking of investors... but have you considred how many people that would want shares not as an investment but just to have?

    I thought it was funny the survey was limited at 99 (though I guessed kind of low I think).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Rational - but is this rational? by s.fontinalis · · Score: 1
      I'd like to have friends with $10k ($100 * 100 shares) to blow on something for fun.

      Of course I was just reminded of the Krispy Kreme phenomena, so maybe I just need to move in different social circles....

    2. Re:Rational - but is this rational? by smallpaul · · Score: 1

      Even a person who wants them "just to have" has a price limit above which they feel the price is higher than the value (if only because it plunges them into bankruptcy). They should bid that price and not a penny more.

  66. U idiots.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Why does slashdot post up garbage like this? I saw that the site wasn't affiliated with Google, After I signed up, because you retards linked straight to the survey.

    My email address is going to be usless now, u fuckwads.

  67. A guess, no more, no less by atheken · · Score: 0, Redundant

    My GUESS... more like $80 opening, $40 closing by the end of the first week of Google trading, mid $20s, where it will stablize.. Or, if we geeks have anything to say about it... $60.22 (think about it...) or $31.415 (decimals shifted to adjust to a possible real world value of G00G stock.) This is like a dotcom, but they have been "developing" for a bit longer, so they might not crash 'n burn maybe.

    1. Re:A guess, no more, no less by sjwaste · · Score: 1

      $80 opening is overvalued given their limited financials they've released. See my post on inefficient markets :)

    2. Re:A guess, no more, no less by atheken · · Score: 1

      which is why it will stabilize in the $20s

  68. well, that totally depends by dmitrygr · · Score: 0, Redundant

    well, that totally depends on the number of shares, that are released. I'd say $50 per share. Seems reasonable.

    --
    -------
    1. Enjoy your job
    2. Make lots of money
    3. Work within the law

    Choose any two.
    1. Re:well, that totally depends by 1000101 · · Score: 1

      That's a bit of a contradiction. If it depends on how many shares are released and you don't know that number, how can you say $50 is reasonable?

  69. Shameless ploy to profit from ./ readers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I might sell aggregated statistics about what people are estimating to investors" (from http://www.googleiposwami.com/rules.html)

    Why are people submitting their guesses, for free? What's to say they're telling truth when they claim to have 10 shares to give away, at all...

    Wake up, people.

  70. employees are locked out for a period of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    So they can't take advantage of any first day fervor. Well, they can, but only by buying/bidding on the open market like anyone else.

    What this system will do is ensure that Google's stock never has an up day for the forseeable future. It'll come out at $X and will fall steadily.

    Also, first day trading should be relatively light, as each share won't trade hands 20 times on the first day.

  71. My prediction by Pheonix5000 · · Score: 1

    Open:$42
    Close:$42

    ...Nani?

  72. percentage of google being sold by throwaway18 · · Score: 1

    Have google said what percentage of the company is being sold in this IPO? I can't see that information in their Form S1 filing but I may be overlooking it.

    The filing says that the maximum aggregate offering is 2.7 billion dollars which presumably caps the launch price, though we don't know what it is capped to until the number of shares being sold is announced.

  73. Well, given how many /.'ers there are ... by magefile · · Score: 1

    We can all take a number, and agree to sign the shares over to /. When the shares inevitable rollercoaster up and down, sell 'em at their peak, and distribute the profits in the form of free subscriber accounts for everyone!

  74. New kind of betting pool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds an awful lot like the "baby" pool, where people in the office bet on the the date and time of birth of an office worker's baby or a worker's wife's baby.

    How does the FTC view this kind of side betting on stock prices? Would their lawyers see it as gambling? And yes, I think it may well qualify as gambling because you will receive something of more than nominal (read, nearly worthless) monetary value if you win. At least, everyone buying the stock hopes it will be worth a lot.

  75. google is really smart! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Typically, a company IPOs and the brokerage houses get all the shares really cheap...$5 range... and then sell them off for $200/share on opening day.

    That's bad for the company in many ways. The problem with that for the company is that there is now unrealistic valuations for their stock...what I've been calling the "beanie baby" effect. Much like the toy fads that sweep the nation with obscene prices for stupid $5 toys, IPO's have the same trouble. The initial price that the shares sell at is all that the company gets ....Right now there are no "stockholders" to please....it's all about what the company needs/wants to be successful! This doesn't affect those VCs and angel investors wanting to leave...they already got their X% of company shares immediately available to sell off...This doesn't really hurt them.

    What typically happens is that the "old boys" on wall street undervalue your company shares when they post them, then of course overvalue your shares to all the clients! It's actually the ultimate in "legal" inside trading. What they're trying to do is sell their shares for as close to "market value" as possible. That means the company gets the most money for selling itself and also gets a stable investor base instead of being victim to an immediate "downturn" from a larger company [say MS] that might use it's buying power to ruin them. They are also trying to get investors that want to be part of google, not just those looking for a quick buck.

    In all it's a smart strategy because they are using the stock market like it was originally intended...for a company to gain capital!

  76. From the Mysterious Future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May 5, 2005??

  77. You're right: (May 5, 2005) = (May 5, 2004); by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 1


    Sorry about that.

  78. Close by gd2shoe · · Score: 1


    Close yes, but almost certainly a little higher. Most winners will understand that the stock they own has that value. There will be some sales afterword though, and in general the seller wont be willing to sell for less than he KNOWS the stock to be worth. Other factors may play in though. If the value is less than people expect, they may lose confidence, and the price would go down. Again, not by much.

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  79. Markets arent efficient by sjwaste · · Score: 1

    If anything, this research should prove that markets are NOT efficient. Even as the world's largest and best developed economy, we've yet to reach the efficient market (such assumptions as: perfect and uniform information, etc). It's not that I'm saying efficient markets don't exist, but I hope this Google experiment proves it. Honestly, they're not making enough profit to warrant a high stock price given their EPS. I'm very curious, though. The dataset from this experiment should look interesting. Is the author going to release it free of charge to academics? I'd hope so.

  80. Does trying to outguess the IPO really matter? by gd2shoe · · Score: 1


    Think about it for a moment. Does it really matter if you can outguess Google's IPO. Let's say you want to invest $100 in Google stock. If you placed one bid of $100, another of $50, %33.33, $25, $20, etc. If the price comes out to just under $20 then you've purchased 5 stocks worth a total of $100. Same with any other fraction of 100. (In case you didn't get it the first time, that was 100, 100/2, 100/3, 100/4, 100/5, etc.)

    Of course investment firms are going to want to do more research and put some more thought into it, but for most of us it really shouldn't be that hard.

    As was said before, IANACPA. Go ask someone who knows something.

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  81. The Stuff DREAMS are made of... by Mulletproof · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google Corp.
    Lagos, Nigeria.

    Attention: The President/CEO
    Confidential Business Proposal

    Dear Sir,

    Having consulted with my colleagues and based on the information gathered from the Nigerian Chambers Of Commerce And Industry, I have the privilege to request your assistance to transfer the sum of $2,700,000,000 (two billion, seven hundred million United States dollars) into your accounts. The above sum resulted from an over-invoiced contract, executed, commissioned and paid for about five years (5) ago by a foreign contractor. This action was however intentional and since then the fund has been in a suspense account at The Central Bank Of Nigeria Apex Bank.

    We are now ready to transfer the fund overseas and that is where you come in. It is important to inform you that as civil servants, we are forbidden to operate a foreign account; that is why we require your assistance. The total sum will be shared as follows: 70% for us, 25% for you and 5% for local and international expenses incidental to the transfer.

    The transfer is risk free on both sides via a process known as 'Dutch Auction' I am an accountant with the Nigerian National Search Engine Corp. If you find this proposal acceptable, we shall require the following documents:

    (a) your banker's name, telephone, account and fax numbers.

    (b) your private telephone and fax numbers ? for confidentiality and easy communication.

    (c) your letter-headed paper stamped and signed.

    Alternatively we will furnish you with the text of what to type into your letter-headed paper, along with a breakdown explaining, comprehensively what we require of you. The business will take us thirty (30) working days to accomplish.

    Please reply urgently.

    Best regards,
    Larry Howgul Abul Arhu Page

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  82. Re:wow, a new contest,, and all i do is give my em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you know what aggregated means?

  83. i'm feeling lucky? by tofu2go · · Score: 1

    can't we just Google for it?

  84. Macroeconomic factors? HAHAHAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real factor is "how much will this company allow us to lowball the price without just saying fuck them". Google chose the fuck them option ... I bet we will see a concerted effort to black ball them. The big financial institutions, and their preferred clients, wont let go of one of their most profitable scams without a fight.

  85. A better idea? by NortWind · · Score: 1

    Instead of giving away shares to whoever guesses closest to the the actual selling price, you could could have auctioned off your promise to supply a share in Google to the highest bidders. People will guess whatever number they like, but they will only bid up to where they feel the share is worth. If they think they can get it cheaper at the real Ggoogle auction, they wont bid that high. As a side benefit, if they bid too high you make money from your auction! If they bid too low, you are only out the difference between their bid and the actual starting price.

  86. Do they even need to make money? :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the inflated IPO earnings actually going into the company it will be very hard for them to burn enough of it to go under anytime soon :) (That is unless wallstreet manages to throw enough dirt at them to scare investors, which they will undoubtedly try.)

  87. That's what he said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously the majority of the market volume is not bought by experts, wether they work at financial institutions is irrelevant.

    They arent experts, just more irrational public :)

  88. Internet companies united? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google recently announced that they will be using a unique dutch auction structure to price shares of their IPO.

    They're gonna sell their stock on eBay!

  89. One difference between Google and VA Linux by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1
    --
    Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    1. Re:One difference between Google and VA Linux by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 1

      That same article points out that 96% of their revenue in the last quarter came from online ads. Are you willing to bet your future on revenue from online ads? Once again, IANACPA or financial advisor. YMMV, void where prohibited.

    2. Re:One difference between Google and VA Linux by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      No, then again I'm not buying shares in Google, just pointing out why VA Linux stock is worth nothing.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  90. Price Is Right! by dbretton · · Score: 1

    Everyone is overbidding.

    I bid $1.

  91. WHO IS of googleiposwami.com by $exyNerdie · · Score: 2, Informative


    WHO IS of googleiposwami.com

    Registrant:
    Tim Ogilvie
    463 Mass Ave
    Apt 4
    Boston, Massachusetts 02118
    United States

    Registered through: GoDaddy.com
    Domain Name: GOOGLEIPOSWAMI.COM
    Created on: 29-Apr-04
    Expires on: 29-Apr-06
    Last Updated on: 29-Apr-04

    Administrative Contact:
    Ogilvie, Tim info@googleiposwami.com
    463 Mass Ave
    Apt 4
    Boston, Massachusetts 02118
    United States
    9176866816 Fax --
    Technical Contact:
    Ogilvie, Tim info@googleiposwami.com
    463 Mass Ave
    Apt 4
    Boston, Massachusetts 02118
    United States
    9176866816 Fax --

    Domain servers in listed order:
    WSC1.JOMAX.NET
    WSC2.JOMAX.NET



  92. Bluff by $exyNerdie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm giving away free shares in Google to find out

    He is so sure he will be able to afford to buy them !!

    1. Re:Bluff by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      More importantly, what kind of contractual agreement is there to make him give you the shares? What's to stop him from selling this information, maybe getting some shares for himself, and not giving away any of them?

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  93. We've had the monkeys, we've had the bubble ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Im sure there are some instutional investors who are able to more accurately value companies ... but their names are a carefull kept secret I guess. Because the vast majority cant even beat monkeys.

  94. Rev Sun Myung Moon by s.fontinalis · · Score: 1

    Gee and I though respectable papers were owned by the Moonies!

  95. Your math is bad. by raehl · · Score: 1

    The RANGE is from 0 to 999.

    The range is *NOT* integer valies - remember that stock prices nowadays trade in increments of $0.01. That's 100,000 combinations * 100,000 combinations, or 10,000,000,000 total combinations to win.

    Now, it's probably a pretty safe bet that the price will be in the range 0->50, which gets you down to 25,000,000 combinations.

    Additionally, you don't need to go through a spam domain, you can just pay $10 for your own domain (if you don't already have one) and use catch-all email forwarding. Use emails guess1-guess25000000@yourdomain.com, have them all forwarded to your email addy, and you're set.

    Although I'm sure the guy has put in some rudimentary protections to prevent that kind of guess spamming, and it would also be pretty easy to detect in the event that you guessed correctly, AND were the only person to guess correctly/were selected randomly.

  96. Bayesian filtering is already dead. by raehl · · Score: 1

    It doesn't block attachment spam with minimal text content, and it doesn't block spam with extraneous non-text content, or content that's been obscured from plain-text so that the normal "key" words don't exist in the filter's corpus.

    I'm already getting 20 spams per day making it into my inbox with a few false-positives a week when a few months ago I got 20 per month in the inbox with virtually no false-positives. The filter is already getting confused.

    1. Re:Bayesian filtering is already dead. by Baumi · · Score: 1

      I'm using POPfile which tries to extract words from attachments and apples other de-obfuscation techniques, as well. It's maintained by John Graham Cummings who tries to keep up with spammer's tricks. I've been using it for about a year now, and so far it's caught practically all of my spams. (Success rate > 98%)

      (Man, that sounded like one of those late-night infomercials, but I swear I'm simply a happy user.)

      Granted, I only get 4 or 5 spams a day, so maybe you're simply ahead of me in the spam curve and I'll be getting there soon, too... :-/

    2. Re:Bayesian filtering is already dead. by ashot · · Score: 1

      I use popfile too, but thats because it works with everything (all spam filters should adopt this methodology), and yes it works to some extent now, but you should consider that if everyone was not like this idiot writing trash in the newspaper, and did install bayesian spam filtering, then immediately it would be not effective and the spammers will find more clever ways of getting around it. Its not hard to fool a computer.

      --
      -ashot
  97. I'm betting the reverse. by raehl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the price will probably decline up to 10% in the first day.

    What I can't decide is if I should bid for a LOT of shares at, say, $1 each, just in case for some reason not enough people bid to take up all the shares, or if I should bid $500 per share, just to make SURE I get some shares, no matter what the price is.

    Which is why I think the price will actually decline on the first day of trading - enough people will probably bid a little higher than they think the stock is actually worth just to cover the case where they undervalue it a bit, and people who actually get IPO shares will find a lack of buyers after the stock has been issued.

    If this were the SECOND time an IPO had been done by dutch auction, I wouldn't be so sure, but... everyone is a newbie at this.

  98. Bad computer choice... by raehl · · Score: 1

    all the heart meds you can count with a Cray

    Vector machines are great at some things, but counting, a serial process, is not one of them. For counting you're going to want raw clock speed.

    1. Re:Bad computer choice... by Tokerat · · Score: 1


      ...unless you count groups in parallel...

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  99. That's the idea, but not the truth. by raehl · · Score: 1

    Google has arranged it so that the stock price starts NOT at the market value, but at the speculation price.

    This is good for Google, as they get the money instead of the old-boy-network insiders, but probably isn't any better for the average joe who buys shares at the speculative price than it was before.

    1. Re:That's the idea, but not the truth. by iabervon · · Score: 1

      You're missing the fact that this is a Dutch Auction. The way this works is that shares are allocated to bidders starting with the highest bid and going down in per-share price until the supply is exhausted (or the demand is exhausted). The lowest successful bid is then takes as the price, and everybody pays that per share, regardless of the prices that higher bidders bid.

      Therefore, there are two possible situations: speculators get all of the stock, and pay a speculation price for it. They all lose, because the stock then drops to the market price, since nobody thinks the stock is actually worth that much, and Google gets a ton of cash from idiots who failed to read that Google wanted to discourage speculation. Or the lowest bidder is not speculating, in which case everybody pays a reasonable price for the stock (that is, a price that someone believes it's actually worth), and the stock is either at the market price (because people like the lowest successful bidder think the value is right) or below it (because not enough people bid the market price, and the lowest successful bidder was someone bidding less).

      The only case in which the stock will go up after the auction is if Google is offerring too much of it, such that there is stock left over after everyone bidding market price or over has gotten their stock, which would mean that there are potential buyers who are not participating in the IPO.

      Bidding higher than you believe the market value of the stock to be just means that you risk the first situation, where you look dumb (because you're buying at higher than you thought the market value was); by speculating, you earn the chance to win the auction and lose money.

      The Dutch Auction is actually a pretty stable system for this sort of thing, because it provides no motivation to bid higher than your guess at the market price, and, if you expect the auction to be well-attended, there is no motivation to bid lower than your guess at the market price, either.

      Of course, there's no reason that the market value of the stock is actually going to be what the stock is actually worth, but that is equally true before and after the IPO.

  100. Not worth the hassle by The+Big+Ugly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google's share price is garunteed to be overvalued. With all the hype surrounding its IPO the price will quickly skyrocket. Any seasoned investor knows that this is one stock to stay away from until things even out. Sure, they is always that chance for a quick profit for day traders. However, the likes of /. readers likely can't come up with or are willing to contribute enough cash to purchase enough shares to make it worth paying the capital gains. My reccomendation, put your money somewhere else. Invest wisely and with a longterm mindset, not because of the hype surround our favorite search engine. But what do I know? I'm just trying to get my brokerage license...

    1. Re:Not worth the hassle by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 1

      I thought the auction system was to help prevent that:

      Old system:
      Google sells their shares at a sensible price to daytraders who then make a fortune selling them on because hype has caused demand to far exceed supply, everybody end up owns overvalue shares which eventually lose their value.

      The new Google system:
      People bid for shares and Google then prices them so that demand doesn't far exceed supply. Hype causes people to pay far more for Google shares than they're worth, but it no longer matters because instead of ending up in daytrader's pockets, all that extra money you invested goes to google - the company you have shares in - so the shares remain worth what you paid for them.

      I could well be wrong here, I'm someone who doesn't know much about the sharemarket.

  101. Is un-PC the new term for idiot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it would seem.

  102. 90-100, and the auction guesses right by kabloom · · Score: 1

    I'm going to guess that the auction system does a good job of predicting and that the opening price is near the closing price. I will furthermore guess Open:$90 Close:$100

  103. Hmm ... Dutch ...Holland .... tulips .... by konmaskisin · · Score: 1

    ....

    Tulip craze:
    http://www.investopedia.com/features/crash es/crash es2.asp ... found it with goodl ;-)

  104. So then... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Let's say there are a few hundred thousand people willing to spend $200 on one unit of stock?

    Not sure if there's a minimum - I gather it might be 100? If so that would put a damper on the people who want a share just for fun.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  105. Book building by awol · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Look, the whole issue with IPOs in the traditional sense is that NewCo (the company to be listed) goes to a big institutional broker to build a book form them. For this privelige NewCo pays the broker one regular sized bucket load of money. The broker then goes to all their friends (the ones that shift lots of stock for them and pay for all the golfing weekends in spain) and says yould you like to buy a million shares.... They construct a book that is almost always undervalued because other wise they could never get the capital from the investers to build the book in the first place and thus fund NewCo. The stock moves from IPO (Initial Public Offering BTW, how ironic is that!!) to secondary trading and a certain bunch of the book built positions are traded out for a profit (the return on the capital they fronted to buuild the book) as the public buys the stock and the true price is found (note, not value, but price :-).

    Google has short circuited this entire process by offering a dutch (sinlge price) auction which will (hopefully) use a maximal clearing volume algorithm to determine the price at which the maximum volume of stock will clear. The other constratints of this algorithm will determine that at the end of the auction there will be no unsatisfied demand at a price that is better than the one at which the stock traded and as such there will be no immediate price pressure on initial secondary trading. So it should stay around the price at which it opens.

    What will that price be? Well thats a good question, but it Google publishes the state of the book over the weeks before the IPO then we can run the MCV algorithm and determine the "if it opened today" price which is usually a very good indicator of the final price as the IPO time approaches (well obviously really :-).

    It is really a very interesting approach and on that the intitutional brokers will not really like very much at all. I wish them good luck.

    --
    "The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
  106. Open high and close lower by ericspinder · · Score: 1
    I'll buck the trend and go on record as saying that the price will start high and end lower, and will go down as an approbation of the "traditional IPO". I like the idea of a dutch auction, to me it is the best way to fairly price an IPO for the benefit of the company, but the market is not used to it (at least for a huge highly anticipated IPO).

    A Dutch IPO (if you will) front ends all of the speculation, combine that with the (still) recent tradition of making boat loads of money off of an Internet IPO; a recipe for disaster. Most people purchasing the stock in the auction will be eager to sell within minutes of open sales.

    (Total guesses:) I say it will be capitalized at $25 to $45 billion at the start, and drop to $7 to $15 billion by the end of the day, with a low as little as $2 to $5 billion. The IPO will not bust (as all the shares will sell), but it will scare the pants off of most investors, look for many stocks to suffer.

    The leading effect on other tech stocks is hard to gage, part of me says that people will sell of their tech stocks to raise money for purchasing stock, but the other part of me says that tech stocks will rise in anticipation of a new tech boom; either way, its a good idea to play it safe in the market that week.

    --
    The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
  107. The point by NoGuffCheck · · Score: 1

    Michaels motivation for putting on this "guessing competition" and getting an idea what they may be prepared to pay for google shares, seems less stupid every time I think about it. So he just asks the slashdot community to give him the answers (way in advance) to the question that everyones asking.. How much will each share be worth at the IPO?

    With a normal IPO we know that the price will be dictated by the normal forces/been counter/brokers. With this dutch method the forces are the every day punter (or at leaste thats the idea). So the best way to find out what the share price will be (read: what the punter using the dutch method will pay) is to survey a sample.

    To me it looks like a creative(read: cheap) way to survey, but what he does with the information is anyones guess, after giving away 10 shares, i guess he'll be looking to make a profit so he's probably going to sell/profit from the info one way or another.

    --
    serenity now!
  108. wild guesses by phyruxus · · Score: 1
    PETER
    Don't worry, you only have seventy-five more to go. (holds up a card with three wavy lines)
    Okay, what's this one?

    MALE STUDENT
    A couple of wavy lines.

    PETER
    (who wants to zap him just for fun)
    Sorry! This isn't your lucky day!

    MALE STUDENT
    I know. I -
    (PETER reaches for the little lever. JENNIFER seems amused, so PETER winks to her. MALE STUDENT stumbles over some words before PETER zaps him.)
    Hey! I'm getting a little tired of this!

    PETER
    You volunteered, didn't you? We're paying you, aren't we?

    MALE STUDENT
    Yeah, but I didn't know you were giving me electric shocks! What are you trying to prove here anyway?

    PETER
    I'm studying the effect of negative reinforcement on ESP ability.

    MALE STUDENT
    The effect?! I'll tell you what the effect is! It's pissing me off!

    PETER
    Well, then maybe my theory is correct!

    Who wants to help me predict the price of a share? (my method is shockingly effective! $5/study! ;-)

    --
    "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
    "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  109. must use transcendental numbers by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Of course no bids will be accepted unless they cleverly incorporate PI, E, PHI or other magical irrational numbers!