

Mark Zuckerberg: Facebook Will Not Go Public Anytime Soon - tlrobinson
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/10/zuckerberg-ipo/

======
papa
When Google was considering the timing of its IPO back in 2003/2004, I
remember reading about an SEC regulation that requires private companies to
make regular public disclosures (10K filings) if they hit certain shareholder
and asset thresholds. There was some speculation that this regulation may have
played some part in forcing Google to go public sooner rather than later.

I don't know where/how it figures into Facebook's thinking, but it may be that
the same issue may arise in which a private Facebook might face some of the
public scrutiny a public corporation might and decide that if they must
disclose, they may as well reap some of the benefits of going public.

For what it's worth, here's the specific reporting obligation I'm referring to
as noted in a Wikipedia article (since I can't find it on the SEC website):

"Companies with more than $10 million in assets whose securities are held by
more than 500 owners must file annual and other periodic reports, regardless
of whether the securities are publicly or privately traded."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_10-K>

~~~
thinkcomp
Fenwick and West has long since convinced the SEC to waive this requirement
for Facebook's benefit. Why such a waiver is in the public's interest, I don't
know.

~~~
mattmaroon
Well, I don't think the requirement itself was in the public's interest,
especially in the era of Sarbanes Oxley. Forcing a company to go public could
be extremely harmful.

------
dlo
In asserting that Zuckerburg's fears are unfounded, the author states, "Google
co-founder Sergey Brin also echoed Zuckerberg’s “hell no we won’t IPO”
sentiments soon before Google, yes, went public."

The quoted text is a link to an article whose first line is the following:

"We are profitable, and we don't need the cash. But it might be nice to have
the currency" of a public company, Brin said ....

Brin does go on to state that being a public company may be a distraction, but
this is hardly a wholesale dismissal of the possibility of going IPO. In fact,
Brin is later quoted as saying that "[t]here's a good chance eventually
[Google's] going to do it."

I don't know if this has been misrepresented before, but you all may be
witnessing the first round in a new game of "telephone"!

~~~
edanm
From Mark Zuckerburg's text: "Since we compensate people at Facebook with
stock and we took investment, I view it as my responsibility to eventually
make that stock liquid for people, but that doesn’t have to happen in the
short term".

That's hardly a wholesale dismissal of the possibility of going IPO, either.

------
mattmaroon
Most of the negative effects he describes of an IPO could be mitigated by a
dual class stock structure similar to Google's. I expect we'll see that when
Facebook does IPO.

------
ghshephard
Given the active secondary / private markets for high profile private
companies, such as sharespost and DAG ventures, the pressure to go public to
give the employees a payout has been greatly diminished. Particularly where
companies like Facebook are actively blessing private placements, and waving
the ROFR, employees are pretty much getting most of the IPO benefits. I'm not
sure how much of this is a result of SOX, and how much is a result of
squeamish CFOs not wanting to have to subject themselves to the requirements
for transparency and predictability that the street requires - but we're
certainly seeing a lot of private companies stay private a year longer than we
did a decade ago.

------
code_duck
As Zuckerberg is a basically a sociopath, I don't consider this particularly
meaningful. It's probably intended to be manipulative in some way.

------
bond
Get ready for IPO...

------
Groxx
Of course not. Then they'd be more open for scrutiny.

