Facebook IPO - First Impression

It all started in 2003 in his dorm. Mark Zuckerberg created Facemash, and uploaded pictures of fellow Harvard students online; placing two pictures next to each other, he let viewers rate which one is ‘hotter’. In a matter of 4 hours, the site attracted 450 viewers and 22,000 photo views. Mark was eventually charged by the Harvard administration for a security breach, and violation of copyrights. He faced expulsion, but the charges were dropped later. 

A semester later, inspired by an editorial in The Harvard Crimson about the Facemash incident, Zuckerberg launch Thefacebook on 4^th February 2004. While membership was restricted to Harvard students in the first month, it expanded to Stanford, Columbia, and Yale in March, and later to other Ivy League schools along with MIT, NYU and Boston University. It was soon present in all universities across US and Canada, and in 2005, allowed high schools and major corporations to join too. In September 2006, it was open to anyone who’s older than 13 and had a valid email. Little did he know during his Harvard days that 8 years later Facebook would become the hottest piece of digital real estate and a multi-billion dollar company. With around 845 million active users already, if Facebook were a country, it would be the third most populous one after China and India. And as far as numbers are concerned, that’s just the beginning. Everyday, the social networking site attracts roughly 500 million active users, who upload close to 250 million photos and ‘like’ or comment on 2.7 billion pages. Globally, one in every seven minutes spent on the Internet, and one of every five pages viewed online, are on Facebook.

On 1^st February 2012, Zuckerberg announced plans for a $5 billion Initial Public Offering – the largest tech IPO since Google in 2004 – valuing the company around $75 – $100 billion. The upper-end of that range would value the company at 100x last year’s profits, or about 25x trailing 12-month sales, which, according to Bloomberg, is more than double compared to Google’s valuation when the search giant went public in 2004 (same year as Facebook was launched). The company generated $3.7 billion in revenue and $1 billion in profits last year. According to the Economist, such a valuation would make it more valuable than Boeing, the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer. While that is by no means cheap, other tech giants are worth even more. Based on market capitalization, Google is worth $190 billion, Microsoft is worth $250 billion, and Apple is approaching $500 billion.

When one thinks about the commercial possibilities that Facebook offers, multi-billion dollar valuations are justified. According to Boston Consulting Group, 3 billion people will be online by 2016. Furthermore, mobile Internet usage is rising at double-digit rates. About 425 million people already access Facebook using mobile devices (including tablets). Speculation aside, the one thing that one can be rest assured about is that more and more users spend more and more time on the website (or its mobile app), be it chatting, playing games, sharing news articles, listening to music, or uploading (and commenting on) pictures and videos. Currently, the average user spends around 20 minutes on the website per visit. By ‘liking’ pages affiliated to businesses, sports teams, activities, stories, events, personalities, etc., users associate themselves with lifestyles and brands, and hence create the digital persona they want. And now, with the Timeline layout, they can build a chronicle of their lives too. This is invaluable for large and small businesses alike, both from an advertising perspective as well as consumer research perspective. That Facebook has an information database with such details about its users, and what it could potentially do with it, is another matter altogether. But one thing is certain; the social networking site, now translated into over 100 languages, already has one in every eight persons in the world signed up, and once it breaks into China (where it is still currently banned), it would become an even more attractive platform for businesses (and perhaps even governments).

There is no doubt that Facebook is an exceptional company in terms of its popularity and growth. However, as far as its IPO is concerned, the key question one should ask is why is it going public in the first place? Usually when companies go public, they raise money (by issuing common stock) to invest it in growing their business. So what does Facebook want to raise the funds for? What is Zuckerberg planning to do with the money? How will it help the website grow its business?

       

In its first prospectus filed with the US SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), the company reported revenues for 2011 worth $3.7 billion, 88% higher than 2010, and net income at $1 billion, which was a 65% rise from the previous year. Hence, it would be fair to conclude that the website can generate adequate internal cash flow to fund operations and expansion (including potential acquisitions). So it makes little sense to raise funds for operational requirements alone. It has after all achieved astounding growth as a private company. So when the prospectus says that the company intends to use the IPO proceeds for working capital and general corporate purposes, I take that with a pinch of salt. Furthermore, it admits that the company does “not currently have any specific uses of the net proceeds planned.”

This brings us back to our main question; if it doesn’t need the money for growth, why is it going public? Facebook answers this question itself. The prospectus states that the “principal purpose” of the IPO is to “create a public market” for its shares and to make the equity stake of the existing shareholders (including employees) more valuable and more liquid. In other words, they are going public to cash themselves in. This is great news for existing investors, but not so much for those who plan to buy its shares via the IPO or in the secondary market.

In a personal letter included in the SEC Filing, Mark Zuckerberg said,

“We’re going public for our employees and our investors. We made a commitment to them when we gave them equity that we’d work hard to make it worth a lot and make it liquid, and this IPO is fulfilling our commitment. As we become a public company, we’re making a similar commitment to our new investors and we will work just as hard to fulfill it.”

The prospectus also states that a portion of the money will be used to pay a portion of the tax obligations related to the initial settlement of RSUs, which in simpler words means that the company would pay off some of the tax due on converting shares given to employees as a part of the IPO. Interestingly, the company intends to invest the proceeds in government securities and term deposits, “pending other uses”. And while the company may use proceeds for acquisitions of complementary technologies and assets, it has made no such commitments yet. Once again, it does not seem like Facebook has a clear idea of what it intends to do with the money.

Another thing worth noting is the arrangement of shares offered. Only Class A shares, which have one vote per share, will be available to public. However, the current board will retain their Class B shares, which have 10 votes per share. Simply put, the IPO is structured in such a way that Mark Zuckerberg (founder, chairman and CEO), who currently owns 28.4% of the company, along with the incumbent management (including the COO, CFO, VPs, other Directors, etc.) will retain majority voting-rights. Hence, the new shareholders will have no say in running the company whatsoever. This is another negative for new investors, even though one can argue that it was expected anyways.

Finally, the company intends to retain its earnings for operational use. This is a deterrent for the class of investors who seek regular dividends. Facebook has never declared or paid any dividends, and does not plan to either. However, considering that the likes of Berkshire Hathaway and Apple (who traditionally were strictly against dividend payouts for many years) too declared a dividend recently, it won’t be a surprise to see Facebook follow suit at some point in the future.

As I’ve already mentioned before, Facebook is an exceptional company. It surely has cemented its place in our daily lives, and has arguably changed the way people communicate, consume and share information. It has given individuals an opportunity to create a digital identity unlike none other. As an organization, it has achieved tremendous growth in very quick time. And it has certainly made its employees and investors a lot of money. However, is its IPO just as exceptional? Will it also achieve the same growth? Will it be able to make the same kind of money for its new investors as it has for its existing investors? Many a times, investors fail to distinguish between a good business and a good investment. As much as I love Facebook as a user, as an investor I am not yet fully convinced about the site’s capacity to translate its impetus into exceptional profits.

That being said, I want to do a follow-up on Facebook, covering possibilities that do make the Facebook IPO attractive, even at such exorbitant valuations. 

             

Infographics

Browsing the web over the weekend, I came across some very interesting infographics, which I though I’d share here. While some of the data (statistics) featured may be slightly outdated, their relevance still remains. Also, for some people, the scope of information in this post would come as rather limited (to China, USA, and Europe), but then again, I'm not exactly writing a book here.

1. China in numbers - Very interesting compilation

2. Rise of the Giant - Tip of the Iceberg?

3. China's Wealth Gap - A natural byproduct of Capitalism?

4. China Online - China's very own Social Media Revolution

5. US / China Trade - Boon or Bane?

6. Where are American Jobs going? - At least unemployment isn't as bad as the 1930s

7. All the Gold in the World - Not enough to cover USA's National Debt

8. America's Digital Divide - Another interesting revelation

9.  USA v Europe - Who's more Productive? - Can you spot the Irony.

10.  European Debt Debacle - A snapshot

 

11. Europe's Crisis - The Complete Picture

12.  Europe's Crises - Role of the European Central Bank

  

Well, that was Fun! 

And Informative too. 

Maybe I'll do a similar post focusing on India (If I can find good material).

Watch this space...

(Disclaimer: None of the above infographics are my own creation. I am merely sharing them here as they are neat sources of information)

Fate of the US Dollar - Greenback making a comeback?

After looking back at the events that shaped and defined 2011, a follow-up post on previewing 2012 ought to have been natural progression. But considering the way that the US Dollar has defied all economic theories in 2011, I think it deserves to be the focal point of 2012’s first post.

Background

In August 2011, for the 1st time in history, rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded the long term rating of the United States of America from AAA to AA+ on the back of “Political Risk and Rising Debt Burden” and maintained the “Negative Outlook” which they had announced earlier in April. The announcement came 3 days after the US Congress voted to raise the Debt Ceiling of the Federal Government by the means of Budget Control Act 2011. This flag of caution was mostly ignored as the other 2 major rating agencies (Moody’s and Fitch) maintained their superlative ratings. However, Moody’s had lowered its outlook to negative in June, and Fitch too did the same later in November. The S&P had already lowered their outlook earlier in April, sending the Dollar to a 3-year low within a couple of weeks.

The blame game started practically immediately after the announcement. President Barack Obama blamed the Bush Tax-Cuts (which he had actually extended). The Republicans blamed the liberal Democrats for out-of-control entitlement spending, and demanded Obama to seek US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s resignation. Meanwhile the Democrats blamed the Tea Party Movement for provoking the idea of US Defaulting on their Debt. The Independents blamed everybody.

But then...

It was not the 1st time that the USA’s National Debt had formed headlines. Since the 2007-08 Crisis, America’s economic recovery had not exactly been remarkable; neither had they drastically reduce their debt. In fact, at over $ 15 Trillion, the US Debt is already 100% of the GDP. Also, at sub-2% GDP growth, economic rebound has been abysmal. And yet, the US Dollar has shown tremendous resilience, and surprisingly perceived by investors as the safest haven for their money. This is not because the USA did something right, but because the rest of the world, chiefly Europe, got several things wrong. And when talks of Greece defaulting on their debt, and Europe going into a recession surfaced, it was the panic among risk-averse investors that drove them back into the Dollar. Now brokerages and some pundits are suggesting that the trend could continue and the Dollar could dominate most of 2012. However, I am still not convinced about the prospects of the Dollar, and once again, would prefer to take a contrarian stance. Let me throw some light on the dynamics that give method to my madness.

A strong US Dollar actually hurts export growth thereby expanding the trade deficit. This is bad news as it hurts American competitiveness in the modern age where, thanks to globalization, consumers have the choice to buy Asian, European or American products. This is the last thing America needs as its economic recovery struggles to gain momentum. This is the reason why the US and Europe have been so vocal about the Chinese Yuan being artificially undervalued apparently. More recently, the US Treasury even criticized Japan for trying to weaken the Yen. So it’s fair to say that the US Treasury is closely monitoring the impact of a stronger Dollar.

If there was one single most influential event that triggered the flight to the Dollar, it would have to be the Euro-zone’s Sovereign Debt debacle. To summarize the entire EU shipwreck in a jiffy, it was simply a case of too much reckless spending by Greece, funded by debt (as it always is), mostly issued by France and Germany. Since participation in the EU required fiscal and monetary discipline, the Greek government kept this mountain of debt a secret, and misreported the nation’s official economic statistics, until the truth finally emerged in 2010. This was the point where the concerns regarding a sovereign debt crisis in Europe, especially the PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain) got louder, and the markets started losing confidence. Hence as the sentiments in Europe got jittery, because of disappointing bond auctions in August, and then Greek bondholders having to take a haircut in October, investors flocked to the Dollar for Capital Conservation.

However, by the time 2012 draws to an end, two possible scenarios could transpire: (a) the Euro-zone resolves their problems and has a concrete plan of action in place (perhaps over-optimistic) or (b) the European Union could either dissolve or expel the troubled nations (most possibly Greece). But the truth is that both those scenarios are extremes and unlikely to materialize. But either way, the one thing that is certain is that the Dollar will see an exodus of capital flowing into either a resurged Euro or a successor to the Euro (especially with Germany’s backing) in the 2nd half of 2012.

The Euro-zone troubles led to some resurgence in the US Dollar. But in the grand scheme of things, there has been a secular shift away from the dollar – both as a reserve currency as well as a trading currency. These are the two essential roles that the Dollar plays in the modern, globally entwined economy, and with those roles reduced, the Dollar will surely lose its supremacy. Let’s take a closer look at what’s happening on these fronts, starting with the USD as a reserve currency. China and Japan are the largest holders of US Treasury Debt (Look at the figure for USA’s foreign creditors). As of August 2011, over 60% of China’s $ 3.2 Trillion foreign exchange reserves were denominated in US dollars (including $1.1Tn in US Treasury Bonds). However, according to Standard Chartered Bank, while China’s reserves grew by $200bn in the 1st four months of 2011, 75% of this comprised of non-dollar denominated assets. China also bought Euros in 2011 in the form of sovereign debt from countries like Germany, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Hungary, thereby adding to their previous European holdings. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao declared that as long as Europe is serious about resolving its issues, China would continue to help financially. In addition to purchasing sovereign bonds, Chinese investments in European corporations too have grown phenomenally as they bought corporate bonds worth $72bn in the 1st half 2011 alone. 

And that’s not all. China has steadily been accumulating Gold reserves too. While its Gold holdings are only 1/8th of America’s, it’s steadily rising. China’s share of global Gold demand has tripled in the last decade from 6% in 2000 to 18% in 2010. And considering it is still only the 6th largest holder in the world with 1,054 tones, which accounts for less than 2% of its total reserves, it is expected that China’s hunger for this yellow metal is all set to rise. China’s not alone in the Gold rush. Other countries too bought gold in 2011 in an attempt to diversify their reserves. South Korea bought 40 tonnes, Mexico 98 tonnes, Russia 63 tonnes and Thailand bought 53 tonnes. Other countries that added gold to their national reserves include Columbia, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela. India’s central bank RBI made an early move, buying 200 tonnes in October 2009 from the IMF. Furthermore, according to estimates from World Gold Council, Indian households bought another 1,059 tonnes of gold between Sept2010 and Sept 2011, taking the aggregate Indian household holdings to 18,000 tonnes. The 2 illustrations below show which countries have the largest gold reserves, and how much does gold account for. 

China and India aren’t the only ones diversifying their reserves earnestly. Japan too has been following suit as its Finance Minister Jun Azum raised concerns about Japan’s $1.3 Trillion foreign reserves being dominated by US dollar denominated assets. In December 2011, when Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda visited China, he announced buying Yuan Bonds worth $10 billion, and also agreed to use Yuan for bilateral trade with China. Furthermore, it also entered into a $15bn currency swap agreement with India recently. The agreement would give India 15 billion dollars to meet its short-term liquidity needs, and Japan would get Indian Rupees to trade with India directly and diversifying reserves at the same time.

China has made it no attempt to hide its ambitions of the Yuan replacing the Dollar as the world’s next reserve currency, and is not only slowly expanding Chinese bond markets, but also making bilateral trade agreements especially with its Asian partners, promoting Yuan denominated trade. It is expected that as the Hong Kong based Dim Sum Bond Market grows in market-capitalization (current m-cap is 35 billion), more countries & corporations will take notice and participate. Already having signed deals with Thailand, Japan and Pakistan in 2011, China is now well on its way to materialize its plans of signing an agreement with the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to settle bilateral trade in the Yuan. The trading bloc is collectively China’s 3rd largest trading partner, and promoting Yuan settlement with them would be a major step in the dragon nation’s long term campaign to make its currency widely-used beyond its own borders, and take up a bigger role on a global stage. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Yuan accounted for less than 1% of China’s trade in 2010, but that number rose to more than 10% in 2011 and is expected to rise to 15% of the total trade in 2012 according to estimates from Deutsche Bank. China has been doing this (signing currency swaps to facilitate Yuan denominated bilateral trade) since the crisis period of 2008. In the graphic below, I highlighted the nations that China has signed such deals only in the last 2 years. As expected, the countries with closer geographical proximity have already been taken on board, and it would be little surprise that within another 2 years, more nations will follow suit, and this graphic will have more shades of red. Hence, in this backdrop, one would have to be very sanguine to maintain a rosy outlook of the dollar. 

Case for the Dollar

Having said all the above, it would be very naïve to write the US off so easily. A strong US Dollar does provide some benefits too. 1st of all, cheaper imports could help boost consumption in America. This rationale often attracts criticism that “Made in China” goods are the root cause of the USA’s deficit, but if an economic paper released by Federal Reserve Bank of SanFrancisco is of any merit, then that criticism is flawed because 85% of every Dollar spent by Americans on products “Made in China” benefits America, while China only gets 15% of the benefits. How? This is because the actual cost of production of those goods is under 15% of the final price that the consumers are charged, and the rest of the costs come from services such as transportation, logistics, retailing, marketing, etc. which are all done within America. However, since the masses do not realize this when they see a “Made in China” label on their goods, and also since 2012 is an election year, one should expect Washington to make politically popular decisions at the expense of prudent economic ones (call it if you want, business as usual).

Some people aren’t as cynical as myself and believe that the USD is indeed the safest best. Investment bank Morgan Stanley recently called the US the “best safe haven “and forecasted that the USD will get stronger in 2012 as deleveraging will cause balance sheets to shrink not only in Europe but around the world. According to another investment bank UBS, US fund managers, who collectively hold $40 trillion in US Dollar assets, and are 1 of the 3 largest holders of the US dollar (other 2 groups being sovereign wealth funds, and foreign central banks), have now stopped diversifying their portfolios. They are now planning on repatriating funds if the US equity markets continue to out-perform its peers.

Albeit at the expense of exporters, a stronger dollar benefits the consumers at some levels as it makes their imported discretionary expenditure items cheaper. However core expenses such as food and housing remain unaffected. Furthermore, cheaper imported raw materials are also a boon as it lowers input costs of production. However, this may not be useful at a time when business confidence and capital expenditure are low, and unsold inventories are already quite high. It should be noted that another implication of cheaper imports is that the country’s trade deficit widens. So I personally think that a stronger dollar, while benefits consumers at some levels, actually hurts the economic productivity of the country. Some companies would relocate their manufacturing base overseas to gain from lower labor costs and cheaper raw materials thereby maintaining healthy margins. This relocating however causes job loss in America (and no jobs means no income, which means no discretionary expenditure, which makes the cheaper imports fruitless).

Finally, a stronger dollar gives the US an opportunity to pay off some of its national debts at a favorable exchange rate. However, this opportunity comes at a time when conflicting political beliefs may make it impossible to make the most of it. As we all know, 2012 is an election year for the US, and any decision made by the Obama Administration, whether good or bad, will be shredded by the Republicans in the Senate, much like they rejected the American Jobs Act a few months ago.

So to conclude, while many pundits are getting bullish on the dollar, I want you to base your own stance on secular, longer-term trends and filter the short-term hullabaloo. And that secular trend is pointing towards a shift of economic power from the West to the East, and there is no better manifestation of this than the descent of the greenback.