About Tom Evslin

Video Profile of Tom Evslin

Follow Tom Evslin on Twitter


Add to Technorati Favorites!
Powered by TypePad
Member since 01/2005


« Vonage IPO – When the Crowd Is Always Wrong | Main | FeedBlitz »

Vonage IPO – How The Bankers May Make a Bundle More Despite the Bust

In some case, the bankers who manage a stock offering can make more money from a bust than a success. It happens when the green shoe drops.

If you look at the front page of the Vonage prospectus, you will see that the banks (called “underwiters”) which took Vonage (called “the company” in prospectus terms) public – Citigroup was the lead bank – earned $31,875,000 in commissions.  Not bad but that’s not quite all.  A little further down on the front page is this line:

“We have granted the underwriters an option to purchase up to 4,687,500 additional shares of common stock to cover over-allotments.”

This is an absolutely standard provision in stock offerings and potentially a very lucrative one.  The over-allotment is commonly known as the green shoe.  The underwriters have thirty days in which they can buy these extra shares at the IPO price.  It’s obvious that, if the stock goes up, the bankers can profit by buying at the IPO price and then selling at the market price.  For example, if Vonage stock were to go up 25% from the offering price, then the over-allotment option would be worth $19,921,875.00 (.25x$17x4,687,500).  Not bad at all.  In the salad days of Bubble 1.0, when stocks typically doubled or tripled postIPO, think what this was worth.  Of course, the company does get extra money by selling the extra shares but has to sell them to the underwriters at the IPO price.

The company I founded, ITXC, had a successful IPO in 1999.  The stock more than doubled from the offering price in the first day.  At some point the underwrites exercised their option.  The company got some more money and the underwriters made more.

But, right now, Vonage stock is going down, not up.  And the over-allotment still may be worth a lot of money to the banks.

In 2000 ITXC had  a secondary offering at about $86 share.  As it turned out, the secondary closed on the day that NASDAQ peaked.  The stock was up for a day or two and then down with the rest of the market.  The bankers didn’t exercise the over-allotment; that is, they didn’t buy any more stock from the company; but they were still in a position to benefit from it.

I’m writing from my experience in Bubble 1.0 so it is possible that things have changed.  However, here’s how it worked.  Often the offering banks sold not only the shares officially offered in the IPO – 31,250,000 shares in the case of Vonage – but also sold the shares they had a right to acquire though over-allotment – all on opening day or soon thereafter.  This is a short sale since the banks don’t actually have the over-allotment shares yet.  But, unlike most short sales, the banks know they won’t lose if the stock goes up because they can always buy the stock to cover the short at the offering price.

So suppose the banks sold the Vonage over-allotment short on IPO day – note that I do NOT know whether or not they did this nor even how to find out.  They would have received almost $80 million for these shares including commissions.  Since they haven’t exercised the over-allotment, just sold the shares which it represents, none of this money goes to the company.

Suppose also that Vonage, instead of going back up continues down, perhaps to $10/share.  The banks can then buy the shares they sold short on the open market for $10 each.  In this case they obviously won’t exercise their option to buy at $17 and the company won’t raise any additional money.  Profit to the banks on the short sale would then be $7/share for a total of $32,812,500.00.  The lower the price of Vonage goes, the more profitable the riskless short sale is to the banks.

I don’t think there is a way to for the bank to both keep the upside potential of the over-allotment AND do the short sale.  They do have to make a choice at some point.  Again, I don’t know what Vonage’s banks did. Either on the upside or the downside, however, the over-allotment can be huge source of bank profit beyond the commission.

It’s all legal.  It’s disclosed right there in the prospectus.  You just have to understand what the over-allotment is and what it means.

Fictional CEO Larry Lazard in my novel hackoff.com: an historic murder mystery set in the Internet bubble and rubble got burned by not understanding how a green shoe might work.  He wasn’t happy.  But fictional trader Sam Gutfreund at fictional bank Barcourt & Brotherson was.  You can read that episode free if you’d like.

Hat-tip to reader Ellen S who told me that the term “green shoe” originated with the IPO of the Green Shoe Company.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Vonage IPO – How The Bankers May Make a Bundle More Despite the Bust:

» links for 2006-06-01 from Sentido Web
Franco Giménez » Photoshop TV Una excelente idea por parte de la NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals), un programa de TV exclusivo para Photoshop… lo mejor de todo, es para ver vía web. (tags: photoshop) Slashdot, ya tiene... [Read More]

» Shutterfly IPO filing perplexes from SiliconBeat
Shuttterfly, the Redwood City online photo site, has filed for an initial public offering, something hinted at earlier this week -- but its finances don't look as good as we thought. To pull off an IPO in this crowded area of online photography, you'd... [Read More]

» RFID company Alien wants to be valued at half a billion from SiliconBeat
Alien, the company just south of Silicon Valley that sells those little radio chips that are embedded in products so that manufacturers, retailers and the military can more efficiently keep track of their goods, wants to be valued at half a billion do... [Read More]



I haven't had the same experience because I've always worked on the sell side of the business but I've been around enough trading desks and spoken to enough clients who misunderstood the nature of that biz. Does the CEO know from day to day or hour to hour exactly who owns all shares? I'm not sure how it can be determined how much of a trading desks capital is at risk at any given moment, in fact given the ability to hedge most things I'm pretty sure it can't be determined except by the desk itself and even then there is a big margin for error. WRT - knife catching - colorful terminology is someting traders and programers have in commmon but while someone might advise against catching a falling knife, I suspect that the market maker of a company in free fall might own a huge ammount of that company's stock at any given moment in time but they are attempting to find the price where buyers and sellers equilibrate even though they might be the only buyer or seller at that moment.



In the spirit of respected peer review, get your facts straight. Your conclusions of outsized underwriter profits are not accurate. Please see our post at


Tom Evslin


My experince has been that the trading desks do not put much of their own capital at risk. They are particularly adverse to doing what they call "catching a falling knife." When pressed, they say that their role is to keep trading orderly but not really to affect the overall price level.

Be interested to hear if you have had a drifferent experience.


I think the massive profit from the short sale that you describe is practically impossible because of the way trading desks are run. When the shares are weak and there are alot of sellers the firms that did the underwriting wind up being the only buyers so while they might make money on that short sale they are taking in more and more stock at lower prices on the way down and regardless of that they have their own capital at risk - another cost - while this is happening unlike a successful offering so its really in everyone's interest to see the shares rise but the market doesn't always cooperate.

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In.

Now on Kindle!

hackoff.com: An historic murder mystery set in the Internet bubble and rubble

CEO Tom Evslin's insider account of the Internet bubble and its aftermath. "This novel is a surveillance video of the seeds of the current economic collapse."

The Interpreter's Tale

Hacker Dom Montain is in Barcelona in Evslin's Kindle-edition long short story. Why? and why are the pickpockets stealing mobile phones?

Need A Kindle?

Kindle: Amazon's Wireless Reading Device

Not quite as good as a real book IMHO but a lot lighter than a trip worth of books. Also better than a cell phone for mobile web access - and that's free!

Recent Reads - Click title to order from Amazon


  • adlinks
  • adsense