Twitter Seeking To Go Public

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Thursday September 12, 2013 @11:33AM from the own-a-piece dept.

awarrenfells writes "While Dell Inc. is announcing its desire to go private, Twitter seems to be heading in the opposite direction with its recent tweet that it seeks to go public. From the article: 'Twitter has announced that it has filed for its IPO. Since Twitter was able to submit confidentially, this indicated that it had annual revenue of less than $1 billion in its most recent fiscal year. The JOBS Act allows for “emerging growth” companies with less than $1 billion in annual gross revenue to file in secret. Goldman Sachs is believed to be the lead underwriter for the deal, and Twitter will reportedly list on the NYSE.'"

56 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Did They ... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 11:38 · Score: 2, Funny

Did they announce this in a tweet?
1. Re:Did They ... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 11:49 · Score: 0
  
  They did!
2. Re:Did They ... by stephenmac7 · 2013-09-12 13:44 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Helpful link: https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/378261932148416512
  
  --
  "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." -- Judge Gideon J. Tucker
Aahh Bless. by Spottywot · 2013-09-12 11:42 · Score: 4, Funny

Bless the little hearts of those tiny emerging companies with turnover of less than $1 billion, they need all the help they can get.

--
In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
would have been awesome had this happened -- by themushroom · 2013-09-12 11:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

a year or two ago when the company was on the upswing, not shortly-to-be-passé.

--
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
1. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Oakey · 2013-09-12 11:55 · Score: 1
  
  That's the point of the IPO!
  
  --
  "Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
2. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Tackhead · 2013-09-12 13:18 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  would have been awesome had this happened a year or two ago when the company was on the upswing, not shortly-to-be-passÃ©.
  Part of the problem with tech industry is that company lifecycles are shortening even faster than product lifecycles.
  If it takes two or three years between the decision to go public and the actual IPO (plus another 6-12 month lockout period afterwards), and a company can only exist for 5-10 years before it becomes obsolete, the time between the decision to exit and the actual exit takes up a huge portion of the company's arc.
  The VCs who backed GRPN and ZNGA made bank. Almost nobody else did. Sometimes you get lucky, like GOOG and LNKD, who raised enough capital to wall themselves off from competition. Sometimes a company can re-invent itself, like AAPL, AMZN and NFLX. Sometimes, you can find a sucker willing to pay top dollar for a worthless asset - MySpace had a good exit and left someone else holding the bag.
  But those are the rare successes. Most of the time, the founder rides the rocket all the way up and all the way down to the ground, and even he ends up getting a fraction of what could have been made if he'd only shopped the company out earlier.
  It's incredibly difficult to build a sustainable business in this industry. If you catch the big industry cycles: mainframe to micro, micro to client-server, client-server to cloud (mainframe), you can do so. Get out of sync with the industry fads - whether you're 1-2 years early or 1-2 years late - and your company will not outlast the pendulum swing. The optimum strategy is to find a fad, slap something together for $X, and try your damndest to get acqui-hired for $2X in a 1-2 year timeframe. Lather, rinse, repeat. If it's so important to be a CEO, sell the damn company anyways, and use the money you made off the last one to start the next one.
3. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Jonah+Hex · 2013-09-12 13:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Twitter has reached ubiquity, especially in the entertainment industry. TV Shows now include Twitter names and hashtags quite regularly as watermark bugs as well as the longer Facebook link during the credits. It's quite telling they put them up as bugs during the actual show with the network's logo bug, and even introduce people with a graphic with their name and Twitter ID, as well as special hashtags during the show. Twitter has beaten Facebook where it counts, in the minds of those who provide entertainment to the rest of us. - HEX
  
  --
  Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
4. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by squiggleslash · 2013-09-12 13:52 · Score: 1
  
  I dunno, I guess you float when you're likely to maximize interest. "On the upswing" is too early. "Shortly to be passe" is the same as "Still on the upswing but not for much longer". So now's a good time.
  By rights, this should be bigger than Facebook. Facebook was something people slack off doing at the office. Twitter is, however, ubiquitous, it's at the office, it's on TV, there are hashtags on cartons of orange juice.
  I'd say this is the perfect time to do it.
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
5. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 15:14 · Score: 0
  
  To repeat the GP's point, though, that's an already-was phenomenon, not a new or even particular recent one. It's been a couple of years since the 2012 U.S. presidential election campaigns were starting up, and I remember the news coverage was lousy with hashtags and inane tweets back then.
6. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Jonah+Hex · 2013-09-12 16:11 · Score: 1
  
  You both have a point for the start of it and the elections were one of the first to use it heavily, but now it's ubiquitous, like a utility. Twitter names and hashtags are the perfect shortening mnemonic. So it may not be Twitter in the future, but it will remain within that format especially since the entertainment industry now uses it everywhere.
  
  --
  Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
7. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by sublayer · 2013-09-12 16:28 · Score: 1
  
  TV Shows now include Twitter names and hashtags quite regularly as watermark bugs ... It's quite telling they put them up as bugs during the actual show ...
  
  I've stopped watching some TV programs because the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has started displaying hashtags during the programs. The ABC is supposed to be non-commercial, and I refuse to watch anything that includes these advertisements. (For what it's worth, I also wrote to them and told them I was switching off. Now if only a few million other people would do likewise...)
8. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by sdnoob · 2013-09-12 16:30 · Score: 1
  
  TV Shows now include Twitter names and hashtags quite regularly as watermark bugs
  those same tv shows used to do the same thing with aol keywords... online, nothing lasts forever except embarrassing photos shared by teenagers.
9. Re:would have been awesome had this happened -- by Jonah+Hex · 2013-09-13 13:20 · Score: 1
  
  "those same tv shows" AOL keywords, MySpace links, even Facebook links, were only on a small number of shows compared to the number using Twitter names and hashtags now. See my other comment above.
  
  --
  Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
pumped and dumped by themushroom · 2013-09-12 11:58 · Score: 2

Yeah, I remember when Netscape had its IPO.

--
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
1. Re:pumped and dumped by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 15:08 · Score: 0
  
  hmmm.. that ipo lead to the payday to beat all paydays... i wonder if aol has learned its lesson about expensive, high profile, and ill-advised acquisitions?
GLWT by Chas · 2013-09-12 12:03 · Score: 0

I honestly think it's going to be yet another fiasco for the tech sector.

--

Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I wish them well by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 12:51 · Score: 1

raising enough capital in just 140 shares
Why does it need to go public? by Rude+Turnip · 2013-09-12 13:03 · Score: 2

This is the part where the original investors cash out and leave the smoldering rubble with regular investors. I like IPOs where the company needs money to grow, not these cash-out schemes.

--
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
1. Re:Why does it need to go public? by mysidia · 2013-09-12 13:43 · Score: 1
  
  This is the part where the original investors cash out and leave the smoldering rubble with regular investors.
  Well... it is a valid exit strategy. Just like "get bought out by Apple, Google, or Microsoft" is an exit strategy.
  I don't see Twitter as a smoldering rubble though.....
2. Re:Why does it need to go public? by bensyverson · 2013-09-12 14:56 · Score: 2
  
  The entire idea of an "exit strategy" exemplifies what's wrong with startup culture. An entrepreneur should be focused on building a great product and a lasting company, not on finding someone to cash them out after 18 months of part-time schmoozing.
3. Re:Why does it need to go public? by Amouth · 2013-09-12 15:40 · Score: 1
  
  Well they might have tired to say what it was for when they tweeted it:
  "We’ve confidentially submitted an S-1 to the SEC for a planned IPO. This Tweet does not constitute an offer of any securities for sale."
  But they were only had 4 chars left and figured people would find "CA$H" tacky
  
  --
  '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
4. Re:Why does it need to go public? by mysidia · 2013-09-12 23:18 · Score: 2
  
  The entire idea of an "exit strategy" exemplifies what's wrong with startup culture. An entrepreneur should be focused on building a great product and a lasting company
  The point of having a startup is to build a lasting business... Although 9 out of 10 startups fail, according to information I have been quoted; exit strategy means success; it means your investment pays off, and you get to reap the rewards.
  It's not that the business is done; it's that it is no longer a "startup" --- and now, more traditional folks should takeover the roles of allocating capital to it, because it's lower-payout, lower-risk now, and: perhaps you would like to do another startup?
  The people who do startups are different, and will get bored, once it's an established boring business, with low risks.
5. Re:Why does it need to go public? by Rude+Turnip · 2013-09-13 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Except in this case, Twitter doesn't actually offer anything in value for the market cap it is seeking. I'm not so much railing on the idea of start-ups, but the idea of these businesses that kick the can down the road and create nothing of real economic value.
  
  --
  Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
6. Re:Why does it need to go public? by kilfarsnar · 2013-09-13 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  Does Twitter even make money?
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
7. Re:Why does it need to go public? by kilfarsnar · 2013-09-13 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  Seems the answer is, "probably". http://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-is-obscenely-profitable-2011-6
  
  --
  "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
8. Re:Why does it need to go public? by Rude+Turnip · 2013-09-13 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  That article doesn't give me a lot of faith. At the level of profitability estimated in that article, the valuation multiple to support what they're going after is fucking crazy.
  
  --
  Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
9. Re:Why does it need to go public? by mysidia · 2013-09-13 11:52 · Score: 1
  
  the valuation multiple to support what they're going after is fucking crazy.
  Since the appropriate valuation multiple is determined by the expected growth rate; perhaps, it is premature to speculate on that, before they have formally disclosed their financials?
10. Re:Why does it need to go public? by Rude+Turnip · 2013-09-14 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'm going to hold to my theory that this is simply a cash-out for the original investors, and that there is no long-term value to secondary market investors.
  
  --
  Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
11. Re:Why does it need to go public? by mysidia · 2013-09-14 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  I'm going to hold to my theory that this is simply a cash-out for the original investors, and that there is no long-term value to secondary market investors.
  In other words; you think the IPO will be a pump and dump scan? Wouldn't it be wise to wait until they release the financials, before jumping to a conclusion?
12. Re:Why does it need to go public? by Rude+Turnip · 2013-09-15 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  If you look at all their possible sources of revenue (and avenues for growth) and back out a conservative amount of expense, you're looking at a company with about $35 million in earnings. That's nothing in the grand scheme of things. It's a shitty company.
  
  --
  Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
13. Re:Why does it need to go public? by mysidia · 2013-09-15 04:07 · Score: 2
  
  If you look at all their possible sources of revenue (and avenues for growth) and back out a conservative amount of expense, you're looking at a company with about $35 million in earnings.
  Their potential sources of future revenue include a portion marketing budgets of 10+ million small businesses in the united states; amounting to a potential of approximately $100 a month per company.
  Or perhaps $5 to 10 billion or so a year.
Microsoft Twit by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 13:27 · Score: 0

That buyout and name change sounds good.
Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by ZorinLynx · 2013-09-12 15:17 · Score: 3, Informative

I've seen more than one awesome company go to suck after going public.
Why? Before going public, they only have to follow the wishes of themselves (the board) and maybe a few investors. They have a lot of freedom on what to do. Not everything the company does MUST be for maximum profit.
After going public, they are subject to the only desire stockholders have: Make money. Period. That's it. Taking risks and not going for maximum financial gain can mean a stockholder lawsuit.
Enjoy Twitter while it lasts, folks.
1. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by JazzXP · 2013-09-12 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  This was exactly my thought when I read about it. Best way to ruin a company is to float it. No longer is it about the employees and customers, it's all about the shareholders.
2. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by phantomfive · 2013-09-12 15:44 · Score: 2
  
  How badly can they mess up really? It's just a website that let's you post a few characters at a time. As long as they keep that, they're ok.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
3. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Artea · 2013-09-12 17:46 · Score: 1
  
  Shoehorning "Premium Services" and more advertising into it.
4. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by gl4ss · 2013-09-12 18:07 · Score: 2
  
  technically they only need to go for "maximum profit" if their charter says so. nowhere is it mandated that it must say maximum short term profit in their operating rules... this is a common misconception.
  however they no longer can lie about their goals - and I'm pretty sure maximum profit was their initial investors idea...
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
5. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by taiwanjohn · 2013-09-12 18:16 · Score: 2
  
  I'm still mystified by Twitter. I have an account, but have yet to find anything useful about it. Every time I check the page, it's just a jumble of random stuff, some of it is good/interesting, but most is not. I guess I must be doing it wrong, but I haven't a clue why it is popular. Can someone here enlighten me?
  
  --
  XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
6. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by phantomfive · 2013-09-12 18:28 · Score: 2
  
  It took me a while to figure it out too. There are two types of Twitter users. Some use it to randomly spam their friends, and get replies almost immediately. It's like a group conversation among whoever is listening at the moment. Kind of like newsgroups except it's only for your friends (because no one else cares) for people who aren't bothered by the short limit.
  
  The other type of Twitter user keeps it as kind of a newsfeed, following people like Vint Cerf, Linus Torvolds, Adriana Lima, Yuja Wang, Barack Obama, or whoever you care about. Some Twitter accounts have fascinating things going on them. It lets you keep up with a certain segment of the world easily. The fact that you can talk to those people and sometimes they talk back is a bonus.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
7. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 18:34 · Score: 0
  
  How badly can they mess up really?
  They could move back to Ruby on Rails so that the site has 17 hours of downtime everyday. With all this new money they could probably develop a really impressive animated web 3.0 (beta) fail whale.
8. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-12 20:16 · Score: 0
  
  The sibling gave a good summary. I don't have an account, but I'll often check the feeds for bloggers I follow because they will often share interesting links that aren't worth a full blog post and have interesting Twitter discussions (which have led to me finding new blogs to read).
9. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by gagol · 2013-09-12 20:19 · Score: 1
  
  They already have that, and the regular service for you and me dont suck. I say they are pretty good example of social media done right. Will it stay that way? The future will tell.
  
  --
  Tomorrow is another day...
10. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by lxs · 2013-09-12 21:08 · Score: 1
  
  It's just a website that let's you post a few characters at a time.
  But before you know it they bring in new terms of service with more restrictions on the kind of messages being allowed (don't want to tarnish the corporate image you know) and suddenly they start becoming a lot more flexible about the sharing of user information. The pattern is depressingly predictable.
11. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Inda · 2013-09-12 21:43 · Score: 1
  
  I use it for news and nothing else. Well, I also chastise my member of parliament, but that's another story.
  
  There was a sonic boom over my town last year, although I did not know that at the time. It could have been a bomb. Within minutes, other people from my town were posting their tweets about the boom. A few recognised that it was a sonic boom.
  
  The local and national news took serveral hours to write their stories, and their stories contained nothing of interest - it was no longer news.
  
  That's one example of how I use Twitter.
  
  I also follow the sport on there. Many small pieces of news never make to the mainstream news sites.
  
  It's another tool in the box.
  
  --
  This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
12. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by FireFury03 · 2013-09-12 21:47 · Score: 1
  
  It took me a while to figure it out too. There are two types of Twitter users. Some use it to randomly spam their friends, and get replies almost immediately. It's like a group conversation among whoever is listening at the moment. Kind of like newsgroups except it's only for your friends (because no one else cares) for people who aren't bothered by the short limit.
  So, uh, kinda like a really limited version of facebook?
  
  --
  http://blog.nexusuk.org
13. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Chrisq · 2013-09-12 22:23 · Score: 1
  
  I use it for news and nothing else. Well, I also chastise my member of parliament, but that's another story..
  Hey, is that you Miss Whiplash?
14. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by taiwanjohn · 2013-09-12 22:29 · Score: 1
  
  That's my impression too, "like Facebook only not as good." Perhaps I'd feel differently if I had more friends who use it, but of the few dozen people I "follow" on Twitter, only a handful are people I actually know (and all of them are also friends on FB). As for keeping up with breaking news, FB is pretty good for that too.
  Coincidentally, an old friend who lives in the USA just wrote a book called "Twitter In 30 Minutes," so maybe that will shed some light. He just posted (on FB of course) that it should be released in a week or two.
  
  --
  XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
15. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-13 00:28 · Score: 0
  
  or 'like facebook, but more focused'.
  Personally, I use them both, and they grew to have different purposes that only slightly overlap; facebook is to keep in contact with friends, while (my use of) twitter is more focused on work and news. It is getting rare that I don't find out about Events on twitter first. (addendum: with very few exceptions, I do not follow companies or anything written by PR departments, only the people behind them; and yes, you get the occasional post about what's for lunch, but those are really quite rare)
16. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by phantomfive · 2013-09-13 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  Facebook doesn't show you everything your friends post, you can't have a conversation over facebook as easily.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
17. Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck... by phantomfive · 2013-09-13 14:02 · Score: 1
  
  Does Twitter have.......any limits on sharing of user information?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
me & the customer by globaljustin · 2013-09-12 15:34 · Score: 1

The customer and I are with you...

The entire idea of an "exit strategy" exemplifies what's wrong with startup culture.
Yep. I agree.
It is an intractable problem, because it the 'exist strategy' short-term notions of business you describe are not being balanced by the free market. There is a lack of regulation that is causing unfair competitive advantage to the extreme-short term investor (think high volume traders). The finance world defines itself on gaming the system faster than it can adapt to the feedback loop.
IMHO the only real ways for a non-wealthy person to combat this are to become some sort of consumer advocate or start your own business.
I *am* starting my own internet related business...not to prove a point or b/c I'm some economic justice crusader...its to profit. However, it is precisely because I agree with you and I think I can make a profit *AND* build a lasting company
Essentially, I am banking my business on that concept. I believe customers, when properly informed, will agree with your sentiments as well.

--
Thank you Dave Raggett
Re:Alright folks, prepare for Twitter to suck roxy by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-13 03:51 · Score: 0

Twitter is just RSS that non-tech people could actually use.
Twitter IPO by Ellie+K · 2013-09-21 16:43 · Score: 1

I honestly think it's going to be yet another fiasco for the tech sector.
I honestly think you are likely to be correct. I use Twitter a lot. It has given me amazing opportunities, that I would never have had otherwise, to interact and share my opinions with people who are so remote from me in distance, intelligence, fame, fortune*, accomplishment and occasionally notoriety.
Here's the problem: Who will pay to sustain that? I haven't. Other users don't either. There are promoted Tweet advertisements. Do they generate adequate revenue to sustain Twitter? I doubt it, but maybe they will. This bizarre IPO, without a public S-1, is troubling, to say the least. Somehow, Twitter needs to generate revenue while remaining (reasonably) open and unbiased as a communications platform. I want them to succeed, but don't know how they will do that.
* Distance: far
* Intelligence: above me
* fame and fortune: I have none; etc.

--
tempus fugit
Re:Does it make money? by Ellie+K · 2013-09-21 16:48 · Score: 1

Does Twitter even make money?
Positive net revenue? Or have a clearly stated business plan that will result in prophit? Uncertain. The secret S-1 is a red phlag, regardless oph what Business Insider says.
* I apologize; my "eph" key is broken, thus my misspellings.

--
tempus fugit