IPO's

[tf]

Has anyone worked out the correlation between advertising of recent IPO's and success. Based on the amount of advertising, Salvus, Storefund and Colville will not happen, Mike Pero shouldn't have happened, and its share price shows, yet Pumpkin Patch and Just Water did minimal advertising, if any, yet were fully subscribed!

[craic]

Most people who buy into IPOs would be people who have some knowledge and exposure to the market. Advertising is largely designed to sell some commodity in preference to some like commodity or, in some cases, to convince people to buy something that they did'nt know they wanted. In my youth, when unemployment was the norm, an older relative used to tell me that if a job was advertised in the paper there was something seriously wrong with it. Now that I have remembered it, I will apply it to IPOs

[MeNoBatty]

Possibly a more appropriate question to ask is did the PR received by each IPO, as compared to the advertising, affect the success of the IPOs? Certain marketing 'gurus' have been spouting this for the last 20 years or so (see links). PPL & JWI have had some good PR as opposed to those funds and Pero which have been rubbished. PR is a lot cheaper and much more effective than advertising for new products (in this case an IPO). Were Cap's 'sheeple' influenced by this?

www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3567437

www.ries.com/Books/index.cfm?Page=RM-FallofAd

[Halebop]

Not sure about the advertising question but fundamentally Salvus, Storefund, Colville and Mike Pero were promoted by people "clipping the ticket". In Pero's case, quite a chunk!

Pumpkin Patch and Just water are both offered by the owners who are maintaining substantial holdings. As owners and founders of successful businesses they will have an eye on detail, including costs and returns.

My bet would be that in years to come that same penny pinching style will show up in their relative performance as well!

Aside Rant: What does Mr Gould care if the mortgage market tanks with the property market and the share price slips to 50 cents? He paid zip. He cannot justifiably argue that he added any value to the equation. While he has enhanced his wealth, in my mind at least, he has damaged his future deal making ability by his rather outrageous display of greed. As a consequence, I'd certainly be cautious and circumspect of any future "offer" he made, even it it screamed BUY!

[Gryffyn]

Colville not happening now according to Gaynor in yesterdays DomPost.

[Placebo]

Gaynor's read the tea leaves and can't make a buck. Shame :D

Good comments re PR vs advertising. I think people are suspicious of advertising per se, and are much more receptive to messages delivered thru PR, particularly when they are presented by "respected" commentators/opinion leaders. People tend to believe what they read in an article and aren't quite as analytical about what has driven this as "news" than they are of advertising.

Interesting observation tho...