www.bloomberg.com Open in urlscan Pro
151.101.129.73  Public Scan

Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

Skip to content



Skip to content
Bloomberg the Company & Its ProductsThe Company & its ProductsBloomberg Terminal
Demo RequestBloomberg Anywhere Remote LoginBloomberg Anywhere LoginBloomberg
Customer SupportCustomer Support

Bloomberg Webinars: Access a broad range of analysis, research, insight & ideas.



BLOOMBERG UK

Europe Edition

 * UK
   
 * Europe
   
 * US
   
 * Asia
   
 * Middle East
   
 * Africa
   
 * 日本
   

Sign In Subscribe


 * Live Now
   
   
   BLOOMBERG TV+
   
   
   BLOOMBERG MARKETS THE CLOSE
   
   The fast-paced program is the quintessential market close show leading up to
   the final minutes and seconds before the closing bell on Wall Street with the
   latest news, data and expert analysis.
   
   
   BLOOMBERG RADIO
   
   
   BLOOMBERG BUSINESSWEEK
   
   Insight and analysis of top stories from our award winning magazine
   "Bloomberg Businessweek".
   
   Listen
   
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
   
   QUICKTAKE
   
   
   QUICKTAKE STORYLINES
   
   Follow Bloomberg reporters as they uncover some of the biggest financial
   crimes of the modern era. This documentary-style series follows investigative
   journalists as they uncover the truth
   
   
   ALSO STREAMING ON YOUR TV:
   
   
 * * Markets
     Markets
      * Economics
      * Deals
      * Odd Lots
      * The FIX | Fixed Income
      * ETFs
      * FX
      * Factor Investing
      * Alternative Investing
      * Economic Calendar
      * Markets Magazine
     
     
     ODD LOTS
     
     Transcript: Dan Wang On the Extraordinary Moment for China's Party Congress
     
     
     MARKETS
     
     Sanctions, Tariff or Ban? Aluminum Traders Brace for Fresh Chaos
     
     
     MARKET DATA
     
      * Stocks
      * Commodities
      * Rates & Bonds
      * Currencies
      * Futures
      * Sectors
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG MARKETS
     
     
     View More Markets
   * Industries
     Industries
      * Consumer
      * Energy
      * Entertainment
      * Finance
      * Health
      * Legal
      * Real Estate
      * Telecom
      * Transportation
     
     
     GREEN
     
     Texas School Asks UBS for Refund After Energy Boycotter Label
     
     
     PURSUITS
     
     NBA's Eastern Conference Has Many Contenders, Many Questions
     
     
     BUSINESS
     
     Domino’s Pizza Soars as Food and Drink Makers Parry Inflation
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG INDUSTRIES
     
     
     View More Industries
   * Technology
     Technology
      * Code Wars
      * Checkout
      * Prognosis
     
     
     SCREENTIME
     
     Netflix Plans to Launch $7-a-Month Streaming Plan With Advertising
     
     
     DEALS
     
     Hong Kong’s BPEA in Talks to Join JIP’s Toshiba Bid, Sources Say
     
     
     PROGNOSIS
     
     Scientists Find Gene Variant Tied to Better Covid Shot Response
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG TECHNOLOGY
     
     
     View More Technology
   * Politics
     Politics
      * US
      * UK
      * Americas
      * Europe
      * Asia
      * Middle East
     
     
     POLITICS
     
     North Korea Tests Another Missile in Latest Provocation
     
     
     POLITICS
     
     Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko Calls Putin’s Nuclear Threat a Bluff
     
     
     FEATURED
     
      * Next China
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG POLITICS
     
     
     View More Politics
   * Wealth
     Wealth
      * Investing
      * Living
      * Opinion & Advice
      * Savings & Retirement
      * Taxes
      * Reinvention
     
     
     SAVINGS & RETIREMENT
     
     Social Security Bump Is Rare Good News for Retirees Battling Inflation
     
     
     REAL ESTATE
     
     Canada’s Housing Agency Sees ‘Modest’ Recession With 15% Price Drop
     
     
     FEATURED
     
      * How to Invest
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG WEALTH
     
     
     View More Wealth
   * Pursuits
     Pursuits
      * Travel
      * Autos
      * Homes
      * Living
      * Culture
      * Style
     
     
     PURSUITS
     
     Yankees, Guardians ALDS Game 2 Rained Out, Will Play Friday
     
     
     PURSUITS
     
     Team Picked to Make 'A Wrinkle in Time' Into Stage Musical
     
     
     FEATURED
     
      * Screentime
      * New York Property Prices
      * Where to Go in 2022
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG PURSUITS
     
     
     View More Pursuits
   * Opinion
     Opinion
      * Business
      * Finance
      * Economics
      * Markets
      * Politics & Policy
      * Technology & Ideas
      * Editorials
      * Letters
     
     
     MATT LEVINE
     
     VCs Need the Good Tweets
     
     
     JONATHAN LEVIN
     
     Another Dovish Inflation Narrative Bites the Dust
     
     
     ANDREA FELSTED
     
     Kanye Has Given Adidas a Yeezy Off-Ramp
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG OPINION
     
     
     View More Opinion
   * Businessweek
     Businessweek
      * The Bloomberg 50
      * Best B-Schools
      * Small Business Survival Guide
      * 50 Companies to Watch
      * Good Business
      * Subscribe to the Magazine
     
     
     SCREENTIME
     
     Coming Soon on Netflix: A New Netflix
     
     
     FEATURE
     
     Exxon’s Exodus: Employees Have Finally Had Enough of Its Toxic Culture
     
     
     ECONOMICS
     
     America Is Unleashing Its Economic Arsenal
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG BUSINESSWEEK
     
     
     View More Businessweek
   * Equality
     Equality
      * Corporate Leadership
      * Capital
      * Society
      * Solutions
     
     
     EQUALITY
     
     Lowe’s New Orleans Staff Petition to Unionize Store, Extending Organizing
     Wave
     
     
     EQUALITY
     
     Companies in EU Can Ban Religious Symbols, Clothing As Long As No Groups
     Singled Out
     
     
     FEATURED
     
      * In Trust Podcast
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG EQUALITY
     
     
     View More Equality
   * Green
     Green
      * New Energy
      * ESG Investing
      * Weather & Science
      * Electric Vehicles
      * Climate Politics
      * Greener Living
      * Cleaner Tech
     
     
     WEATHER & SCIENCE
     
     Hurricane Threat Shifts to US East as Gulf Coast Dodges a Strike
     
     
     GREEN
     
     Drought Worsens Across US Midwest as Mississippi River Dwindles
     
     
     FEATURED
     
      * Data Dash
      * Hyperdrive
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG GREEN
     
     
     View More Green
   * CityLab
     CityLab
      * Design
      * Culture
      * Transportation
      * Economy
      * Environment
      * Housing
      * Justice
      * Government
      * Technology
     
     
     CITYLAB
     
     California Allows Digital License Plates, With $1,100 Price Tag
     
     
     HOUSING
     
     Florida Republicans Are Fighting Gainesville’s Zoning Reform, and
     Themselves
     
     
     ECONOMY
     
     Meet Kastle Systems, the Covid-Era Kings of Back-to-Work Data
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG CITYLAB
     
     
     View More CityLab
   * Crypto
     Crypto
      * Decentralized Finance
      * NFTs
      * Regulation
      * Technology
     
     
     CRYPTO
     
     SEC Finds a Way to Keep Up With the Kardashians
     
     
     NEW ENERGY
     
     Bitcoin Cowboys Are the Ultimate Stress Test for Texas’ Power Grid
     
     
     CRYPTO
     
     Crypto Hackers Set for Record Year After Looting Over $3 Billion
     
     
     FOLLOW BLOOMBERG CRYPTO
     
     
     View More Crypto
 * More
   
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
   
   
   

LIVE NOW
US House Hearing on Jan. 6 Attack on Capitol Watch
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Pause
Unmute

Current Time 0:00
/
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%

0:00
Progress: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time -0:00
 
Playback Rate

1x
Chapters
 * Chapters

Captions
 * captions settings, opens captions settings dialog
 * captions off, selected

Fullscreen

This is a modal window.



Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.

TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaque
Font Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge
StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional
Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall
Caps
Reset restore all settings to the default valuesDone
Close Modal Dialog

End of dialog window.


Play Again




Opinion
Matt Levine


YOU HAVE TO GET THE RIGHT TICKER

Also SPAC buybacks, public investors in private markets, package vacations and
NFTs.

By

Matt Levine

+Follow
April 15, 2021 at 4:46 PM GMT


SHARE THIS ARTICLE


Copied
Follow the authors
Matt Levine is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering finance. He was an editor
of Dealbreaker, an investment banker at Goldman Sachs, a mergers and
acquisitions lawyer at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and a clerk for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit. @matt_levine
+ Get alerts forMatt Levine


Programming note: Money Stuff will be off tomorrow, back on Monday.


COINBASE

Coinbase Global Inc., the big cryptocurrency exchange, went public yesterday in
a direct listing that ended up valuing it at about $86 billion. Here is an odd
fact:

> Coinbase Chief Financial Officer Alesia Haas said in an interview Wednesday
> morning that one of the reasons that the company picked Nasdaq was because the
> bourse offered the ticker symbol “COIN,” which wasn’t part of the New York
> Stock Exchange’s pitch.
> 
> “Ultimately that they had the ticker COIN, and that was a really great ticker
> for us to get,” Haas said.

So, one, yes, she’s absolutely right, that's a great ticker for them to get, and
of course they couldn’t go with NYSE if Nasdaq offered them the COIN ticker.
Finance is not especially rational these days, and investors want a good ticker,
so you have to give them one.




Second, how weird is it that Nasdaq owned the COIN ticker? As far as I can tell,
the rules allow each exchange to reserve a small number of tickers for their own
use forever, and a larger number of tickers temporarily (for up to two years).
You might think that the way this would work would be (1) the exchanges pitch a
company on going public, (2) the company chooses an exchange, (3) the company
chooses its preferred ticker, (4) the exchange reserves that ticker, and (5)
eventually the company goes public with that ticker. But apparently there is
nothing to stop an exchange from squatting on a ticker and saying to the company
“hey, if you want the only logical ticker, you gotta go with us.” What a strange
competition.


More from
Bloomberg opinion
VCs Need the Good Tweets
Another Dovish Inflation Narrative Bites the Dust
Kanye Has Given Adidas a Yeezy Off-Ramp
Variable Mortgages May Never Make a Comeback

Anyway, Coinbase was also the first big direct listing on Nasdaq. An odd thing
about direct listings is that you don’t know how much stock was sold. In a
traditional initial public offering, a company says “we are going to sell 10
million shares, and our current shareholders are going to sell another 5 million
shares,” and then they sell those shares, all at once, at a single price that
the company’s investment banks negotiate with public investors. And then the
stock opens for trading and the public investors can trade it among themselves,
but generally the company and its early investors sign lockups promising not to
sell any more stock for a while. So those 15 million shares are all the shares
that you can buy or sell, for months, and investors just trade them back and
forth.

With a direct listing, the stock just opens for trading on the stock exchange.
It opens with an opening auction, the same way every stock opens every morning
on the stock exchange: People who want to sell put in sell orders, and people
who want to buy put in buy orders, and the stock exchange’s machines match them
up to find a market-clearing price. (In practice, the machines send out notices
about what the price seems to be, so that people can put in more orders, in an
iterative process that can take a while; Coinbase didn’t open until about 1:25
p.m. yesterday.)



Generally speaking you’d expect that the only people putting in sell orders, in
that opening auction, would be the company’s private investors: They’re the only
ones who have any stock to sell. 1  But a second after the stock opens, the
stock will trade normally on the exchange, and there will be buyers and sellers.
Some of the sellers will be people who bought the stock in the opening auction
and want to flip it; other sellers might be early investors who owned the stock
before the direct listing, decided not to sell in the opening auction, and then
decided to sell later — a second or minute or hour or week later — in regular
market trades. There’s generally no lockup, so they can do that any time. If you
buy on the stock exchange, you won’t know if you’re buying from a hedge fund
flipping stock it bought a minute ago, or from a venture capitalist who owned
the stock before it went public, or from the company’s founder.

A theory that I sometimes hear from capital markets bankers is that IPOs result
in higher stock prices than direct listings, because in an IPO there are just
fewer shares available. If a company sells 10% to 20% of its stock in an IPO
— sort of the normal range — then there just won’t be that much supply; people
wanting to buy the stock will have to buy some of that relatively small supply
from other public shareholders. (This is sometimes given as an explanation of
the IPO pop.) If a company does a direct listing where most or all of its stock
is available for sale, then there will be a lot more supply, so the price will
be lower. 

Coinbase has about 186 million shares outstanding 2 ; it registered almost 115
million of them for sale in its direct listing. About 81 million shares traded
yesterday, at an average price of $366.87, for a total of about $29.7 billion of
trading. Presumably Coinbase’s private shareholders did not sell 81 million
shares yesterday; presumably most of that trading was new public shareholders
trading among themselves. On the other hand, in the opening trade, some 8.84
million shares were sold for $381 each, for a total of about $3.4 billion of
stock that definitely came from Coinbase’s existing private shareholders. That’s
the minimum amount of stock that existing shareholders sold yesterday — the
minimum size of the IPO, as it were — and the maximum is something less than 81
million. A broad range.



You can see something like this in the price action: The stock opened at $381,
and 8.84 million shares were sold at that price; the stock then climbed (as you
might expect from an IPO with limited supply), and then it dropped (as you might
expect if more insiders sold and more stock became available), closing at
$328.28. If you are an early Coinbase shareholder who sold in the opening trade,
you did well; you didn’t “leave money on the table” by selling at a low price
and then watching the stock climb. You just sold at the market price, in a
market without a lot of supply.


SPAC BUYBACK!

AvePoint Inc. is a private company, “the largest data management solutions
provider for Microsoft 365.” It is planning to go public by merging with a
special purpose acquisition company called Apex Technology Acquisition Corp.;
AvePoint and Apex signed a merger agreement last November. The merger is taking
a while: As is standard in SPAC mergers, Apex’s public shareholders need to vote
to approve the deal, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has not yet
approved the proxy statement that Apex has to send to them before they can vote.
As we discussed on Tuesday, the SEC has also raised accounting questions about
the warrants in SPAC deals, which may further delay the proxy and the deal.

Meanwhile AvePoint is chugging along, providing data management solutions for
Microsoft 365. It announced preliminary financial results for the first quarter
yesterday. It did not have a profit, per se — it will have a loss of $4.1
million to $11.9 million — but I guess that’s pretty good for a company going
public through a SPAC. It has about $65 million of cash.

It also announced a share buyback. Of the SPAC’s shares:

> In addition, today AvePoint announced that the Board of Directors has
> authorized a share purchase program pursuant to which the Company may purchase
> up to $20.0 million of Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation (NASDAQ: APXT,
> “Apex”) common stock until the date on which the SEC declares Apex’s S-4
> Registration Statement effective. The closing of the business combination
> remains subject to customary closing conditions, including SEC review and the
> approval of the shareholders of Apex and AvePoint. In light of the recent SEC
> statement regarding accounting and reporting considerations for warrants
> issued by Special Purpose Acquisition Companies, or SPACs, Apex, together with
> its advisors, is reviewing the terms of its warrants in order to determine the
> proper accounting treatment.
> 
> “This share purchase program demonstrates the Board’s confidence in our future
> and our commitment to deliver value to our shareholders,” said Dr. Jiang. “Our
> strong cash flow and balance sheet enable us to create value for our existing
> shareholders by reducing dilution associated with the proposed business
> combination at what we believe to be an attractive valuation.”

I love it! 3  Sometime in the next few months (it hopes), AvePoint is going to
go public; it will raise about $230 million for itself by, effectively, selling
stock to SPAC shareholders, and will raise another $262 million to partially
cash out its existing private shareholders. 4  In effect, it will sell about 49
million shares to the SPAC shareholders and new PIPE (private investment in
public equity) investors, at $10 per share, like an IPO but at a fixed, known
price.



But now it thinks that deal is just a touch too dilutive, so it’s going to buy
back about 2 million shares. And since the IPO — I mean, the SPAC merger
— hasn’t happened yet, and won’t for a few months, it’s going to buy back the
shares first. First buy back the stock you don’t need to issue, then issue it.
Sure. 

The stock — the SPAC stock — closed yesterday at $11.15 per share, suggesting
that public shareholders of Apex think they’re getting a good deal on AvePoint.
I suppose that’s a reason for AvePoint to buy back stock, though it is also a
little awkward; if you buy stock at $11.15 knowing that you’ll issue it a few
months later at $10, you are kind of wasting $1.15 per share. 5  AvePoint isn’t
committed to buying anything — the buyback “will be subject to market conditions
and other factors” and “AvePoint is not obligated to acquire any particular
amount” — and perhaps they’ll only buy if there are dips. 

You could tell more cynical stories. The way that SPACs work is that
shareholders of the SPAC have withdrawal rights: If they don’t like the deal,
they can demand their money back (here, about $10.05 per share in cash held in
Apex’s trust). The stock is trading at $11.15 now, so presumably Apex
shareholders like the deal, but they still have a few months to change their
minds. If the stock drops below $10.05, it would be rational for Apex
shareholders to redeem, meaning that AvePoint might get considerably less than
the $492 million it’s expecting. Spending $20 million to stabilize the stock
— to provide a bid to try to keep it above $10.05 — might conceivably firm up
that $492 million (er, $472 million). I don’t particularly believe this story
— $20 million isn’t all that much, and anyway the buyback cuts off when the SEC
approves the proxy statement and so can’t prop up the stock in the home stretch
— but I suppose this is a possible reason for a pre-SPAC buyback.



I guess the limit case is to buy back all the stock. We talked the other day
about a SPAC deal (for Grab Holdings Inc.) where the money in the SPAC’s trust
was not really the point of the deal, because Grab was raising way more money
from PIPE investors than from the SPAC itself. Here, arguably the money in the
SPAC’s trust is not really the point of the deal, because AvePoint is already
retiring shares; it doesn’t really need (all) the money. What it needs is to go
public. The SPAC mechanism lets it do that, even if the money is an
afterthought.


PRIVATE MARKETS ARE THE NEW PUBLIC MARKETS

The traditional way for private capital markets to work is that an investor is a
long-term partner of the companies it invests in. The investor — a private
equity or venture capital firm — plans to own shares for many years, without
much opportunity to sell them. Because it will be locked in for so long, it will
want to do careful due diligence to understand the business and get to know the
management team. It will also want some governance rights: It might want a seat
on the board of directors so it can supervise its long-term, illiquid
investment. And because private companies are often young and immature, without
the professional management and stable business of public companies, that board
seat, and the relationship generally, will give the investor the chance to guide
and advise the company. The investor won’t just give the company money; it will
give it mentorship and connections and wisdom.

Meanwhile, the company more or less gets to decide who can buy its shares: Most
private-company stock is bought directly from the company; secondary markets are
small and illiquid, and anyway the company can put transfer restrictions on its
stock so it can’t be traded. So the company, too, will be looking for a good
partner, someone who understands its business and can help it grow and who will
be a helpful board member. Investors will compete on their ability to give
companies mentorship and connections and wisdom, as well as money.

The traditional way for public capital markets to work is that an investor just
decides what company it likes and buys its stock. The investor — a hedge fund or
mutual fund — might plan to hold the stock for days, or for years, but either
way it generally can sell whenever it wants to, so buying the stock is not an
irreversible decision. The investor might do a little due diligence, or a lot,
but either way it won’t place too many due diligence demands on the company: It
will read the company’s public filings, maybe ask a few follow-up questions,
perhaps meet with investor relations or the chief executive officer, but it will
not expect the company’s management team to stop work for a week just to answer
the investor’s questions, and if it does the management team will say no. In
rare cases the investor (generally an activist hedge fund) will ask for a board
seat, but most investors won’t, 6 and if they do the company will usually be
skeptical about giving it to them. The company has professional managers and is
already executing on its business; it would find it annoying and strange if an
investor came along and tried to mentor it.

Meanwhile the company often won’t even notice when a new investor buys a big
chunk of stock. You can just buy stock on the stock exchange without telling the
company; the company has no say in it. Investors compete to invest in a company
only in the sense that whoever pays the highest price gets the stock.



These differences are not absolute. Sometimes public companies will want to
raise a lot of cash from private-type investors (private equity funds, strategic
partners), and there will be a long and invasive due diligence process.
Sometimes public companies will want mentorship and wisdom from an investor, and
will try to get that investor to join the board. 



And, as I keep saying, private markets are the new public markets: Private
companies are bigger and more mature and more valuable and more famous and more
liquid than they used to be, all of which should put pressure on the traditional
private-market approach of diligence and board seats. If you run a $40 billion
private company and you want to raise a billion dollars, and the investors you
call ask for weeks of meetings with managers and customers, extensive financial
reviews, and board seats, you might just say no. “We’re a big famous company and
we are what we are,” you might say; “if you need to do a lot of diligence to
understand us, then you’re out. And we know what we’re doing; if you need to sit
on our board to tell us how to do our jobs, then you're out.” 

This creates an opportunity for public-type investors to do public-style deals
with private companies: If you skip the extensive diligence and governance
demands, your money will be more appealing to a lot of big in-demand startups
than traditional venture funding will be, so you will get in on good deals. And
because you get good deals, and because you get them quickly, and because you do
not spend a lot of time or money or effort on diligence and monitoring, you can
pay higher valuations than the traditional venture investors who make a lot of
work for themselves and their portfolio companies. 7



And so there has been a rise of “crossover,” public-type investors buying stakes
in big unicorn startups at high valuations without demanding a lot of the
traditional trappings of venture investments, and a parallel rise of venture
capitalists complaining about this trend.

But here’s a good post from Everett Randle at Founders Fund about Tiger Global,
“a tech-focused ‘crossover’ that has dominated media headlines & VC gossip
circles for the last 12 months due to its record-breaking deal pace & aggressive
style.” One point that Randle makes is that Tiger Global can accept lower
returns because it deploys capital faster: If you raise a billion dollars and
put it all into profitable investments right away, you will make more money than
if you put it in a bank account and spend years thinking about which investments
to put it into. (This is a public-market approach: Public funds are typically
fully invested; venture capital funds typically deploy investor capital over
time.)

But another point he makes is that Tiger Global just doesn’t care about a lot of
the stuff that most VCs care about, and that a lot of startups probably find
Tiger Global’s approach a relief:

> Herein lies the second outdated (and false) norm/narrative that Tiger can
> exploit — the core pitch of most venture/growth products is built around the
> various areas of value-add that the fund will provide a startup, when in
> practice the funds provide little-to-no actual value. … 
> 
> For many Founders, I also think the feature set [of Tiger Global] represents a
> “better” capital product relative to the norm, because it lacks the potential
> downside that comes from a new highly-involved investor who ends up being more
> of a drag than a help, or even worse ends up being actively malignant to the
> board and business.

If you are an 18-year-old starting a company in a dorm room, having a famous
venture capitalist sitting on your board and helping you figure out how to run a
company is probably a good idea. If you are the CEO of a multibillion-dollar
company that happens to be private, you probably feel good about yourself and
have the board you want; you just want money. A public investor knows how to
just give it to you.


NICE WORK

Last week I made fun of boutique investment bank Moelis & Co. for giving its
junior employees a $10,000 special bonus “that the firm is encouraging to be
used on improving mental health.” I wrote:

> What does it mean to spend $2,500 “on improving mental health”? Pay for
> therapy sessions? Buy drugs? Pay your rent for a month so you can quit to look
> for a less demanding job?

You sort of get what they’re going for; Moelis is looking its young bankers in
the eye and putting its hand on their shoulder and saying “we know you are sad,
here’s some money, take care of yourself, okay?” But the actual thing doesn’t
make any sense.



Meanwhile boutique investment bank Houlihan Lokey is giving its junior bankers
money to spend on mental health in a more direct way:

> Houlihan Lokey Inc. will offer some workers an all-expenses paid vacation as
> it seeks to lighten the load for its workers amid a surge in mergers and
> acquisitions.
> 
> “Our team is going to celebrate our achievements with a global getaway,” the
> firm said in a memo to staff seen by Bloomberg, which contained a link to some
> of the available trips they could opt to take. “No not all together (after all
> there is still a pandemic), so whether you choose a secluded beach or a ski
> adventure or a culinary experience, the choice is yours.”

First of all, yes, nice, this is the right basic idea; it combines the idea of
giving people money with the idea of forcing them to spend it on self-care and
getting away from the office. Giving people $10,000 runs the risk that they’ll
pay down their student loans and keep working until 3 a.m. every night until
they explode; giving them a free vacation increases the chances that they’ll
take a vacation. “The boutique investment bank will also offer analysts in the
U.S. a one-time $10,000 bonus,” which also helps.



Second, though, these are like … pre-selected package vacations? (Litquidity has
the memo; it says “Click on the link of available trips to pick the package that
speaks to you.”) Ew, no. The classy move here is to say “take yourself a nice
vacation and put it on the corporate credit card.” 8  And then everyone takes
whatever vacation they want, and they are much happier than they are with the
firm-selected package deals. Ideally you don’t even specify a price limit and
assume your bankers can figure it out. Some people will subtly compete to spend
as little as possible of the firm’s money, and other people will subtly compete
to spend as much as possible of the firm’s money without getting fired, and
realistically the winners of both of those competitions are going to go far in
banking. Extreme frugality and sensitivity, and extreme lavishness and
boundary-pushing, can both work well; what you don’t want is mild timidity.

Third, imagine reading this memo, your stomach dropping at “Our team is going to
celebrate our achievements with a global getaway,” and then the relief at “no
not all together.” Surely there are no more terrifying words in the English
language than “our team is going to celebrate our achievements with a global
getaway,” but in fact this is fine and actually nice! Just as like, comedy
writing, this memo is nice work.


NFTS

Okay this is a little funny:

> Overpriced, the first high-end fashion brand where the value is held in the
> NFT and not the garment, is pleased to announce that the companies first NFT
> powered clothing piece just sold for a record 26,000 USD on Blockparty.co,
> breaking the world record for the most expensive hoodie ever sold at a primary
> sale.
> 
> The One-of-one Hoodie features Overpriced’s patent-pending scannable V-codes
> that enable viewers to wear, authenticate, and show off their unique NFT in
> public via a pop up image link on any smartphone. If at any point the Hoodie
> is lost, stolen, damaged, or sold, the V-codes can be invalidated and a new
> hoodie will be shipped to the new owner’s address of choice, thus becoming the
> new authentic piece.

There is a picture of the hoodie, which … I guess looks like it cost $26,000, in
that it is garishly ugly and has a swear word printed on it. The pitch email I
got says that “the value is held in the NFT, not the garment,” and “observers
can scan the garment to display the NFT, see how much the hoodie cost, and view
the ownership chain of the garment.” I suppose you could just sell a non-NFT
hoodie for $26,000 and leave the price tag on, but this way you get to show off
how much you spent on your sweatshirt using the immutable code of the
blockchain. 

I make fun of non-fungible tokens a lot, but to be fair most people who create
non-fungible tokens and sell them for piles of money are also making fun of
them. Like, NFTs are mostly a joke, and the joke is always “I can’t believe
anyone is buying this thing,” and the people who buy the thing are generally in
on the joke. “Ahahaha, look how much money I have, this is ridiculous,” is their
side of the joke. Here’s a story about a sale of NFTs at Sotheby’s that ended
yesterday:

> Another work, “The Pixel,” sold for $1.4 million and elicited bids from many
> top NFT art collectors in part because its medium-gray monochrome represents a
> single pixel, the building block of digital imagery. The competition winnowed
> to three bidders who spent more than an hour and a half dueling it out in
> small increments—lobbing some bids as low as $50—before before crypto-art
> collector Eric Young won the work. At one point, the artist acknowledged the
> protracted match by tweeting images of snails and calling it a “pixel scale
> bidding war.”



Buying one gray pixel for $1.4 million is of course much more of a flex (and
much funnier) than buying one ugly hoodie for $26,000; no one can see you
wearing the pixel and scan a code to find out how much you spent on it, but the
people who matter will know. Or they won’t, I don’t know, who cares, you’ll be
laughing to yourself, with the pile of money you have left over after buying a
bunch of NFTs.



Also if you look at the actual bidding history for the pixel, it is all, like,
funny numbers. The final bid was $1,355,555, which is not particularly funny,
but is still odd, for a Sotheby’s auction; usually they move in rounder
increments. One earlier bid was for $1,337,420.69, a concatenation of all the
internet’s joke numbers. The point of buying an NFT is not just to prove that
you can spend a large amount of money on absolute nonsense; you should also,
ideally, prove that you can spend a large and funny amount of money on nonsense.
You need to have a sense of humor and sprezzatura about it; you need to throw
around your pile of money with a wink.


THINGS HAPPEN

Citi Flexes SPAC Muscles for a Record Profit Under New CEO. BofA Shares Slide as
Tepid Loan Growth Counters Trading Bonanza. Bitcoin and Dogecoin Prices Soar to
Records as Coinbase Lists. For Madoff Victims, ‘Tragedy Goes On’ After Scammer’s
Death. Biden Imposes Sanctions on Russia, Restricts Buying New Debt. China’s
Very Bad Bank: Inside the Huarong Debt Debacle. Singapore Trader’s Lavish
Lifestyle Allegedly Fueled By $740 Million Fraud. Dell Plans Spinoff of $52
Billion Stake in VMware. Gupta carved up business empire in attempt to secure UK
Covid loans. “But how does a wild horse help productivity in the workplace?”




If you'd like to get Money Stuff in handy email form, right in your inbox,
please subscribe at this link. Or you can subscribe to Money Stuff and other
great Bloomberg newsletters here. Thanks!

 1. I think it would be *very* hard forshort sellers to put in orders; how could
    they argue that they had a locate to borrow the stock? I suppose you could
    imagine a market maker going short in the opening auction, but why?

 2. See page 80 of its prospectus. (The relevant numbers are Class A plus Class
    B shares of common stock “issued and outstanding, pro forma.”)

 3. Andrew Walker pointed it out to me on Twitter.

 4. Apex raised $350 million in its initial public offering and now has about
    $351.9 million in its trust (see page 240 of the draft merger proxy).
    Alongside the SPAC, there is a committed $140 million PIPE (private
    investment in public equity) frominstitutional investors, for a total of
    about $492 million of proceeds from the deal. Of that, $262 million will go
    to cash consideration for existing AvePoint shareholders; the remainder will
    go to the combined company’s balance sheet. My model of SPACs is that the
    existing company is just selling stock to the SPAC; on that model, AvePoint
    is selling 23 million shares to the SPAC shareholders and PIPE investors,
    and AvePoint’s existing shareholders are selling 26 million more shares to
    them, for a total of $492 million in cash. (Though they are also giving some
    shares to the SPAC’s sponsors, roughly for free.) See pages xvii and xviii
    of the merger proxy for a breakdown of the cap table.

 5. Not really; what is your alternative? Wait until after the merger, and plan
    to buy back stock later? You probably think your company is great and the
    stock will only go up from here, so better to buy it back at $11.15 now than
    at $15 later. The issuance at $10 is a sunk cost at this point, even though
    it hasn’t happened yet; if you think it will trade up from $11.15 you might
    as well buy it now.

 6. In part *because* getting inside information as a board member might
    restrict their ability to trade: Liquidity is generally a better risk
    management tool than governance.

 7. The bad news is that, while private-company liquidity is often better than
    it used to be, it isn’t always great. You *are* still locking money up in an
    illiquid investment without much diligence or control. In many cases you are
    sort of assuming that other, earlier investors kicked the tires and have
    control and will push the company to go public eventually.

 8. When I was a junior lawyer at a very lucrative law firm, the standard move,
    during or after a particularly difficult deal, was for the partner to say to
    the associate “take your significant other out to a nice dinner and put it
    on the firm’s card.” After sending, like, a $4 million bill for merger
    advice, this was a rounding error for the firm’s finances, but it was a
    nice, grown-up, gesture.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or
Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Matt Levine at mlevine51@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Brooke Sample at bsample1@bloomberg.net



0 Comments


SHARE THIS ARTICLE


Copied
Follow the authors
Matt Levine is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering finance. He was an editor
of Dealbreaker, an investment banker at Goldman Sachs, a mergers and
acquisitions lawyer at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and a clerk for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit. @matt_levine
+ Get alerts forMatt Levine

Have a confidential tip for our reporters?
Get in touch
Before it's here, it's on the
Bloomberg Terminal
Learn more


LIVE ON BLOOMBERG
Watch Live TVListen to Live Radio
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute

Current Time 0:00
/
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%

0:00
Progress: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time -0:00
 
Playback Rate

1x
Chapters
 * Chapters

Captions
 * captions settings, opens captions settings dialog
 * captions off, selected

Fullscreen

This is a modal window.



Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.

TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaque
Font Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge
StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional
Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall
Caps
Reset restore all settings to the default valuesDone
Close Modal Dialog

End of dialog window.


Play Again




POPULAR IN OPINION

 * Andrea Felsted
   The Rich Are Living in a Different Economic World
 * James Stavridis
   Putin’s Air-Terror Campaign Against Ukraine Is Already Failing
 * Javier Blas
   Let’s Talk About Russia’s Other Gas Export Bonanza
 * Mark Gongloff
   ‘Recession? What Recession?’ Say Luxury Shoppers
 * Parmy Olson
   Zuckerberg’s $1,499 Headsets Won’t Help Meta



Terms of Service Manage Cookies Trademarks Privacy Policy ©2022 Bloomberg L.P.
All Rights Reserved
Careers Made in NYC Advertise Ad Choices Help