How do we explain the two contradictory headlines about Facebook's IPO this morning? From Reuters, we get "Facebook's IPO already oversubscribed: source"; and from Bloomberg comes, Facebook IPO Said to Get Weaker-Than-Forecast Demand." Can both really be true? There's something about this IPO that has brought with it a particularly intense nitpicking. Perhaps it's the huge valuation Facebook is expected to get? Or the celebrity surrounding Mark Zuckerberg and his dorm room project-turned-world-changing website? But we're getting every detail of this thing in a way we haven't seen with other tech IPOs over the last year.
These two headlines seem like they get at the exact opposite thing. The first provides a sunny version of what's going on: "Despite concerns about slowing growth, a lofty valuation and signs the company is having trouble ramping up revenue from mobile advertising, institutional investors have so far indicated demand for more shares than Facebook has available, the source told Reuters," write Alexei Oreskovic and Olivia Oran. Whereas the second gives a gloomier take. "Facebook Inc. (FB)’s initial public offering has so far generated lower-than-expected demand from institutional investors who are concerned about the company’s growth prospects, people with knowledge of the matter said," write Serena Saitto, Jeffrey McCracken and Zijing Wu. An Anonymous source claims people are dying to get their hands on the stock versus an analyst saying it's overvalued. Boiled down, they really say the exact same thing: Someone thinks something about Facebook; No one knows anything.