I’ll start out by underlining that I don’t know enough about WE to have a usable investment opinion about the offering’s merits. I do have opinions, though. It’s just that they’re more like my thoughts about the Mets than a way to make money. Anyway, here goes:
–the WE structure isn’t new. Think: a savings and loan, or a hotel chain, or an airline or an offshore drilling company, or a container ship firm–or, for that matter, a cement plant or a coal mine. All these involve owning expensive long-lived assets which are typically debt financed and whose use is sold bit by bit. Although there may be attempts at branding, with varying degrees of success, in the final analysis these are commodity businesses.
–in good times, this is a favorable structure for a company to have. Costs remain relatively constant as selling prices rise, so most of the increase drops down to the pre-tax line. Rental/purchase contracts may limit annual price increases, but investors typically factor in anticipated rises relatively quickly
–in bad times, it’s not great. Customers may stop purchasing with little notice, sometimes walking away from contracts or renegotiating them sharply downward (using the threat of termination as leverage). Offshore drilling rigs are an extreme example of feast/famine cyclicality
–because of cyclicality, PE multiples for mature firms with this structure tend to be low. When such companies come to market, they tend to try to ride a wave of energy generated by previously successful IPOs–meaning that simply the appearance of their offering documents is a sign of potential overheating
–in the case of WE, investor perception appears to be frosty. This is partly because of what I’ve just written. Also, from what I’ve heard and read, the 350+-page prospectus is not particularly illuminating (I’ve flicked through it but haven’t analyzed it myself)
The arrival of the WE prospectus coincides with a sharp selloff in the shares of recent tech-related IPOs.
Two possible reasons:
Wall Street thinks that the marketing campaign for WE heralds the end of the line for the current IPO frenzy, on the argument that the underwriters would be presenting a higher quality offering if they had one. This is what I think is going on.
The other possibility I see is the week-long, humorous but kind of scary Alabama weather discussion, an episode I think makes anyone question the mental stability of Mssrs. Trump and Ross.
In any event, given that some newly-listed tech names have fallen by a quarter or more over the past week or so, I think it’s time to sift through the ashes.
Having said that, I do suspect that a significant rotation away from these former market darlings, triggered by WE but based on valuation, is now underway. This will only mark a fundamentally new direction for the stock market if the tariff wars go away completely. I don’t think this will happen. So I’d buy a partial position now and hope to pick up more on further weakness. Remember, too, that this is a highly speculative corner of the market, so it’s not everyone’s cup of tea.
Pingback: What stocks to invest in = my take « PRACTICAL STOCK INVESTING | Stock Investing