????1958年，當(dāng)美國實(shí)業(yè)資本家費(fèi)爾德成功鋪設(shè)了第一條橫跨大西洋的海底電纜時，如果當(dāng)時就有了現(xiàn)代化的金融媒體，只怕我們看到的情形或許會是許多宣傳報道都在哀嚎，稱這個項(xiàng)目沒法賺錢，而不是驚嘆于它所帶來的跨洲際即時通訊能力。而現(xiàn)在，對于Twitter近期IPO后的贏利能力，以及它已經(jīng)確然為我們帶來的便利之間，也存在著類似的失衡。

????我并不是要在這里預(yù)測Twitter上市后短期內(nèi)的股票走勢，不過我愿意向大家披露一下我個人在二級市場購買股票的計劃。我給出的只是一些個人的淺見，以便打消一些顧慮，同時表達(dá)一些重要的觀點(diǎn)。

????過去三年里，我一直在說，Twitter是一個出類拔萃的全球信息平臺，在短期內(nèi)不太可能被復(fù)制或挑戰(zhàn)。它已經(jīng)從文化和政治上挑戰(zhàn)了這個世界，而至于Twitter可以在商業(yè)世界里可以有什么樣的作為，Twitter的創(chuàng)始人甚至還沒有進(jìn)行過任何我們看得見的嘗試。

????由于市場機(jī)制的作用，加上華爾街的短視可能影響到股票的估值，Twitter上市后股價略高或略低都是有可能的事情。但我決定忽略我聽到的大多數(shù)流言，因?yàn)槲铱粗氐氖菍?，所以我愿意承?dān)初始買入價可能過高的風(fēng)險。

????順便說一句，我并不推薦其他人也按這種方法來投資，因?yàn)檫@種投資策略非常大膽，不合常理。不過我的計劃和大多數(shù)人不一樣。

????我想說的重點(diǎn)是，去年五月份Facebook上市后的悲慘表現(xiàn)與Twitter上市后的表現(xiàn)并沒有必然聯(lián)系。散戶投資者們可能很難看出這兩次IPO間的區(qū)別，媒體也是一樣，因?yàn)椤澳衬衬秤謥砹恕北旧砭褪且粋€媒體人喜歡大書特書的題目。

????我相信媒體幾乎一定會連篇累牘地對這兩次IPO進(jìn)行對比，可以說這基本上是無法避免的情況，但他們也正是錯在這里。首先記者們有點(diǎn)擊量的任務(wù)，其次，就算是一個潛在的壞消息也比一個溫和的預(yù)測傳播得更迅速。不過在我看來，F(xiàn)acebook的IPO雖然執(zhí)行不力，但卻并不會影響Twitter的IPO。首先是因?yàn)槿A爾街已經(jīng)從前車之鑒中汲取了教訓(xùn)。其次要指出的是，Twitter為了把自己和Facebook區(qū)分開來也做了很多努力。另外我們也知道，各大交易所對可能出現(xiàn)的意外情況也越來越警惕了，不管上市的公司是誰。最后，媒體機(jī)器對待這次IPO也會比上一次更克制、客觀。

????下面這三種情況在Twitter的IPO過程中絕對不會出現(xiàn)。

????股票砸在承銷商手里

????摩根斯丹利（Morgan Stanley）不會領(lǐng)銜這次交易，不過它仍然會在這次IPO中扮演非常重要的角色。Twitter此次選擇了高盛（Goldman）作為首席承銷商，意味著這個承銷商不必依賴大量的零售經(jīng)紀(jì)人來完成任務(wù)。考慮到這筆交易的大概規(guī)模，零售經(jīng)紀(jì)人們雖然也會獲得一定的配額，但是他們不會遇到上次Facebook上市時把大量股票砸在手里的情況。

????隨便問一個股票經(jīng)紀(jì)，他都會告訴你，對于一支股票來說，如果你要多少股，人家便給你多少股，那就是現(xiàn)實(shí)版的“死神來了”。早年間在我自己也做股票經(jīng)紀(jì)的時候，每次我代表客戶要求要買X股的股票，對方說“好的，沒問題”，那就明白無誤地表示這筆交易要悲劇了。

????If the modern financial media had been around in 1858, while Cyrus West Field was laying the first transatlantic telegraph cable under the ocean, we'd have been treated to hundreds of screeching headlines about the project's lack of immediate profitability -- rather than marveling at the instantaneous connection being established between two continents. I think there is a similar disconnect between the skepticism with which Twitter will be viewed in the near term and the miraculous nature of what it has actually built.

????I'm not going to make a prediction about what the Twitter IPO will do in its first days of trading. I will, however, disclose my plan to buy shares for my own personal account in the secondary market, pretty much no matter where it opens up. I'm giving you my bias upfront so that we can dispense with any suspicion and make some important points here.

????I've said consistently for three years now that Twitter is a one-of-a-kind, global information utility that probably will not be replicated or challenged any time soon. It's changed the worldculturally and politically, and its creators have barely even scratched the surface in terms of what it might be capable of for business purposes.

????Twitter shares may trade lower or higher upon coming public as market mechanics and The Street's myopic perceptions manifest themselves in the stock's valuation. I plan to ignore most of what I hear because I want in for the future, and I'm willing to risk that my initial buy-in price is too high.

????By the way, I don't recommend that anyone else invest this way. It's pretty reckless and unconventional, but I have a different game plan than most.

????The key point I want to make here is that what happened with Facebook (FB) in May of 2012 has no bearing on what will or won't happen with Twitter. Retail investors will have difficulty seeing the difference between the two events. The media will also struggle to separate them because "Here we go again!" is a classic journalism trope that practically writes itself.

????I believe the press will mostly be wrong in relentlessly making this Facebook-Twitter comparison, as they inevitably will. Everyone's got a pageview quota to fill, and potential bad news travels faster than a moderate forecast. In my view, Facebook's poorly-executed IPO won't matter for Twitter's precisely because of the lengths The Street has gone in distancing itself from that embarrassment. I would point out that Twitter itself has gone to great pains to distinguish its coming offering as well. In addition, we know that the exchanges will also be exceedingly more vigilant and alert to potential hiccups, regardless of which the company chooses to list on. Finally, the media hype machine will be more subdued than last time -- and certainly more chaste.

????Below are three things that will absolutely not happen with Twitter's IPO ...

????Dumping stock on Mom and Pop

????Morgan Stanley (MS) won't lead the deal, although it will play a big part in the syndicate. Twitter's gone with Goldman (GS) -- which means the lead underwriter isn't attached to a massive retail brokerage salesforce. Given what will be the deal's likely size, retail brokers will get allocations, but they won't have stock dumped on them like they did with Facebook.

????Any broker will tell you that the kiss of death on a new issue is whenever you're actually being granted the size you had indicated for. In my prior life as a broker, any time I had submitted a request for X number of shares for clients and the answer came back, "Yes, okay," it was a sure sign that the deal was doomed.