TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3 MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3 Stating reasons behind the failure of latest (1996) and previous (1992) in relation to garnering sufficient interest from investors.................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION Financial valuation implies for the process which in turn used for determining the present value pertaining to expected future cash flow of assets. In this regard, discounted cash flow (DCF) model is highly significant which assists in estimating investment value referring future cash flows. It emphasizes on assessing expected future cash flow by taking into account discounting rate. Further, IPO (initial public offering) implies for the process where shares of the company are sold to institutional investors. Usually, IPO is underwritten by one or more investment banks for funding purpose. The present report is based on the case scenario of Spatial technology Inc which involved in designing and offering modellingsoftware as well as applications. In this, report will provide deeper insight about the aspects due to which latest and previous IPO failed to generate interest of investors. Besides this, report will also shed light on Spatial’s strategy in relation to penetrating the market. Report also depicts influence of Spatial management team on IPO process. MAIN BODY Stating reasons behind the failure of latest (1996) and previous (1992) in relation to garnering sufficient interest from investors Impact of Spatial management team on IPO process is enumerated below: Cited case situation presents that, in 1995, management or board team of Spatial Technology decided to renew attempts pertaining to IPO. Hence, during this period, IPO plan introduced by Spatial’s Technology generated effectual interest with regards to investment banking. Thus, management team of the firm started to identify investment banks which are available in the market. At that time, investment banking institution showed their enthusiasm towards company’s technology. Hence, concerned team members took decision in relation to going publicly by keeping in mind market opportunity available. In the year of 1996, board members of Spatial Technology accepted offers given by investment banks. However, market conditions were not stable or uncertain during such concerned period. According to the case given decision pertaining to launching IPO in August or September considered as risky. Referring such aspect, management took decision in relation to postpone IPO.Furthermore,
given case clearly exhibits that deal in relation to signing IPO was not highly effectual. Hence, as per this, no legal binding or contract signed between Spatial and underwriters.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser