Economics novice here. How did we get such a huge difference (40%!) between the IPO price and the current price, when both sides had $3.4 billion at stake on getting that price "right"? Is there some huge information disparity here?
Moreover, if investors feel that $24 a share is a fair price, why weren't they swooping in before the IPO and, say, offering $20 a share for the whole chunk?
Sorry if this seems like a ridiculous question, but it seems to me like there should be some extremely large free market force (on the order of $1.4 billion) preventing the founders and employees from missing out on all that money. Am I wrong?
Moreover, if investors feel that $24 a share is a fair price, why weren't they swooping in before the IPO and, say, offering $20 a share for the whole chunk?
Sorry if this seems like a ridiculous question, but it seems to me like there should be some extremely large free market force (on the order of $1.4 billion) preventing the founders and employees from missing out on all that money. Am I wrong?