Dot-Com Greed Knew No Bounds

[We wrote the following column for the Sunday San Francisco Examiner a month before the dot-com bubble burst in March 2000. Overnight zillionaires were a dime a dozen back then because countless investors couldn’t wait to pay practically anything for the shares of unproven companies. Nowadays, billion-dollar scores on Wall Street are much rarer, but as the lucrative IPOs last year for LinkedIn and a few other purveyors of Vaporware II demonstrated, enough greed and stupidity still remain to make canny stock-promoters rich. RA]

It’s said we are separated from the rich, the powerful and the famous by a chain of no more than six friends of friends. This means that if you are looking for a job in the White House, or a way to meet Winona Ryder, it should take no more than half-a-dozen phone calls to get in the door. But I’m beginning to wonder whether it would take even that many calls, on average, to reach a friend of a friend with eight-figure net worth. There seem to be so many of them around these days. More than lottery jackpot winners, as far as I can tell. Although I personally know a dozen guys who have reaped spectacular riches from stocks in the last few years, I’ve only known one big-time lottery winner in my life — “Bunky” W., who wrestled heavyweight for Atlantic City High School in 1967.

Bunky hit the New Jersey lottery for $1 million, which made him a celebrity at our thirtieth reunion, held at Trump’s Casino in the summer of 1997. But these days, with Wall Street’s IPO boom sprouting megamillionaires like dandelions in May, a story like Bunky’s would barely raise an eyebrow at the next reunion. Arthur’s would, though. He is a childhood friend and among the brightest students in our graduating class of about 700. In physics and math, he always had the answer on his slide rule before the rest of us had even parsed the question. Arthur breezed through MIT and took a job with a company whose forte was designing equipment to detect the presence of black holes in outer space.

He shifted into entrepreneurial mode in the 1980s with the invention of a computer language that supposedly was going to revolutionize the way machines talked to each other. Perhaps the venture would have made him rich if he’d possessed Bill Gates’ flair for marketing — seasoned, perhaps, with just a touch of Gatesian ruthlessness. However, he had neither quality, and that is probably why his software never even made it to the shelves. That may have been a stroke of luck, since it would have occurred a decade before investors went into hyperdrive a few years ago, in their seemingly boundless zeal for hot new ideas. Worse still, the product might have gone head to head in its infancy with one of Microsoft’s. Instead, Arthur kicked around for a few years in the software business before joining a Boston-area startup a few years ago that has since pushed his net worth into the big leagues.

Insider Stock Worth $500M

The company sells software and services that help businesses manage their own software on the Internet. Investors took to the idea in a big way. The company went public last August at $16 a share, but within a few months it was bid up as high as $131. Arthur’s 550,000 shares of insider stock made him worth a tad more than $72 million at that point. If it were just one man’s riches, that would be quite a story. But Arthur isn’t even the biggest fish at the company: there are four others above him in the firm’s hierarchy.

Assuming each has at least half a million shares of insider stock, that translates into a lot of money. More, even, than the half-dozen or so biggest lottery winners of all time have taken home. Over that time, I can recall reading about only a few people in America who have won jackpots exceeding thirty or forty million dollars. But here we have just one company in Boston where five people standing around the water cooler made $500 million on paper in the space of just a few months.

As we know from the business pages, there are companies like his all over America, each with a bunch of VPs, CTOs and CIOs who have grown fabulously rich on insider shares. Richer, even, than lottery jackpot winners. Where is all that money coming from? There can only be one answer: From the pockets of millions of investors, all eager to share in the bounty of a bull market that has created more than $8 trillion of paper wealth in just the last few years. It is pretty well spread around, too. Even before some key stock averages went vertical in late 1998, there were more than three million U.S. households with liquid net worth exceeding $1million. Now the number is over 4 million, with about 400,000 in the $5 million category and 60,000 worth at least $10 million.

Small wonder, then, that the IPO business is so hot, or that there are hundreds of new companies in the U.S. where a few employees standing around the water cooler could be collectively worth half a billion dollars. Corporate insiders are hitting much bigger jackpots than Lotto winners, and much more often. The statistics tell us why: For every 10,000 pikers who can throw a buck or two at the lottery each week, there are a hundred millionaires ready to sink $50,000 apiece into some hot new IPO.

***

(If you’d like to have these commentaries delivered free each day to your e-mail box, click here.)

  • L. Kyda January 22, 2012, 11:00 am

    There doesn’t seem to be any company that went public last August (2011) at $16 a share. Other than “Arthur,” are the other details also intended to obfuscate the facts?

    The closest possibility for an August 2011 tech IPO would be Carbonite Inc., which is Boston-based, but its share price never went anywhere near $131.

    • Rick Ackerman January 22, 2012, 9:52 pm

      Get a life, Kyda! If you’d read the intro, you’d know that the piece was first published nearly 12 years ago.

  • mario cavolo January 21, 2012, 7:54 am

    Here’s the sentence that gets me thinking “Even before some key stock averages went vertical in late 1998, there were more than three million U.S. households with liquid net worth exceeding $1million. Now the number is over 4 million, with about 400,000 in the $5 million category and 60,000 worth at least $10 million.”

    How do those numbers stack up now, and not just in America, but here in rising Asia led by China, and over on the European continent, too?

    U.S. seems to be in a double whammy, for the middle class that is, straight up uncontrollable bad timing. Being in the wrong country at the wrong end of a multi-decade economic cycle, and lastly, truly as a victim of a govt/stock market/financial system gone amock and deeply self-serving. (that’s saying it way too nice)

    Whereas as a simple matter of timing, if you’re in China, perhaps India a few other emerging country choices, you’re now in the right country at the fresh end of a long economic cycle…hmm, a lucky couple billion people?

    In fact, yes, attribute it to nothing more. Our very real Mr. Wang’s family is a family of not 2-3, but 4 generations living together with family wage earners at $200-300/month each, over the past 20 years that had yet in their rather low level struggling yet comfortable life, managed to acquire three 900 sq ft apts to inhabit at prices in the USD $15k. (By the way, as comparison even in Scottsdale, back in the mid 60’s a a 2000 sq ft single home sold for USD $30k, now priced at around $150k ). Back to Mr. Wang, in their country which just happened to have an economic expansion during their lifetimes, their typical low/middle class apts are now worth still a reasonable $150k, total close to a cool half a million USD, of course, mortgage free.

    Now lather rinse, repeat, in three dozen urban cities all across the country. These are homes that are NOT in a bubble. For the bubblicious flavor, turn to China’s 4 major cities and multiply those numbers again by a factor of 2 to 5. Yet, unlikely, in fact, extremely unlikely, those broad market prices will ever fall more than 30% from current levels.

    Relevance to today’s article? 🙂 …surely, as we should pause to note where insanely lucky wealth comes from, as the tech IPO’s made mere mortals rich, indeed, also a case of being in the right place at the right time, with other factors like your degree, intelligence, attitude, drive to succeed, social status, etc., having far less to do with your good fortune.

    Should I begrudge the Mr. Wang families for their good fortune? Of course not. However we can’t say the same if gains were ill-gotten at the expense of others, for any state of affairs in any country, where a few million people got themselves filthy rich, not by the grace of good timing and circumstance, but by screwing their country’s entire societal and financial underpinnings, not to mention the global financial system. Now that this band of self-serving asswipes also happens to be your elected political officials and banking industry executives.

    I believe the phrase was “Houston, we have a problem.”
    And our circumstances now are like that Apollo space capsule threat, where the difference between stability and obvious disaster was a very fine and obvious line, with no further backups, no life preservers. One minute you have air, the next you could be in the vacuum of space with your eye balls popping out. Primarily, today’s air is the creation of digital dollars to recapitalize a financial system that is already at its ruin. I want to suggest that because we now have in our lifetimes an unprecedented global-sized rise of the middle classes, plus a few other encouraging macro trends, the system will in fact somehow maintain enough of a stasis to avoid a global-sized asset disaster such as Argentina or Zimbabwe or Taiwan or Germany, etc. Because at this stage in world affairs, the system is more connected together than ever and so if it does well or goes to hell, its going to be across the globe. We saw just a taste of that in ’08 when because of a U.S. bank problem, for example, tens of millions of factory workers across China’s Guangzhou basin were out of work, not to forget of course U.S. workers. That’s some serious trickle down damage.

    I also, and I mean this for the sake of deep genuine concern for all of us, that you really should have some of your asset portfolio in Chinese RMB. I know you who are reading this is “in America” but I want to remind you that MILLIONS of Americans and Europeans across the world live in China and have 70-100% of their assets in RMB. If, when and how the USD crumbles, it is highly highly likely you will be glad to be holding some RMB rather than some nasdaq tech shares 🙂

    Cheers, Mario

  • John P January 20, 2012, 6:52 pm

    There is a saying – The ‘A’ students teach, and the ‘B’ students work for the ‘C’ students. Maybe that is because the C students have interests outside of school and have better people skills? consequently they do better in real life a.k.a. business.

  • ken horn January 20, 2012, 5:02 pm

    Hey Rick, in your article you call the entrepreneur Arthur, but I have a feeling that is not his real name. I think his initials are AE (am I right?). Let me know. Also, I’ve missed the last couple of reunions, so if you can conjure up a couple of guys that you might meet at a water cooler, maybe we can bring out the next hot IPO.

    &&&&&

    Yes, you are right, Ken. To generalize, though, it was highly focused ‘C’ students who seem to have done best. One manufactures socks, another does laundry, and a third, Alan G….well, I’m not sure what he does, but he never bothers with reunions and supposedly has homes in Aspen, Taos and a half-dozen other such places.
    RA

  • Chet January 20, 2012, 10:22 am

    Excellent article, Rick.