????IT行業(yè)的大多數(shù)公司至少從營運或現(xiàn)金流角度看是盈利的，但GAAP盈利（即考慮到非現(xiàn)金支出）就不那么普遍了。很少看到等待IPO的公司規(guī)模很小或者虧損連連，這對于整個市場的正?；怯欣?。而且，說到底，利潤率也很重要：一家銷售額為5,000萬美元—1億美元的軟件公司能上市，因為它的毛利潤率是80-90%；一家電子商務(wù)公司的毛利潤率是20-30%，再加上高昂的客戶獲取成本，上市必須具備更大的規(guī)模（可能至少是5-10倍）。

??? 3.二級市場見高下。要讓股市投資者慢慢對一家新上市公司感到“放心”，需要有6-12個月的時間，同時等待像流通盤小、內(nèi)部人士鎖定期等因素顯現(xiàn)。我們可以圍繞“高成長的軟件和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)公司絕對估值應(yīng)為多少倍”這個標準進行有益的探討，但顯然二級市場已經(jīng)根據(jù)利潤率、增長率、競爭優(yōu)勢等因素清楚地分出了這些公司的優(yōu)劣。

????比爾?格利去年的一篇文章很好地分析了為何有些公司的股價是營業(yè)收入的10倍多，而大多數(shù)公司卻做不到這一點。看看軟件和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)行業(yè)新上市的一些公司，你就會發(fā)現(xiàn)差距有多大。下面的數(shù)據(jù)截至上周，從中我們就可見一斑：

????? LinkedIn – 股價是過去12個月營業(yè)收入的16倍以上

????? Zynga – 股價是過去12個月營業(yè)收入的8倍以上

????? Carbonite – 股價是過去12個月營業(yè)收入的3.4倍

????? Active Network –股價是過去12個月營業(yè)收入的2.4倍

????我要說的不是Active的估值倍數(shù)就“應(yīng)該”是2.4倍或者Zynga就“應(yīng)該”超過8倍，或者其他哪家公司的估值倍數(shù)是合理的。有些科技股在二級市場表現(xiàn)非常強勁，其他股票則苦苦掙扎。但二級市場投資者顯然是根據(jù)不同的內(nèi)在要素和行業(yè)要素，對近期一些新上市的股票做出了評判。這對于資本市場的整體健康和可持續(xù)性是件好事……但如果近期上市的所有公司都直線上漲或下跌，對于IPO體系可不是件好事。

??? 4. 上市后業(yè)績的穩(wěn)定性一如既往的重要——如果貴公司的營業(yè)收入和盈利能力仍非常不可預(yù)測，最好還是先不要上市。近期有些公司上市后的業(yè)績?nèi)跤陬A(yù)期，股價都受到了嚴厲的懲罰。最近體驗到這種痛苦的Pandora絕不是唯一一家，上周隨著其2011年4季報公布，Pandora的股價下跌了約25%，已明顯低于16美元的IPO價格。

?

??? Most companies in the IT sector are profitable at least on an operating or cashflow basis, although often not on a GAAP basis when non-cash expenses are taken into account. It's pretty rare to see smaller scale businesses or wildly unprofitable ones in the IPO pipeline, which is good for the overall market normalization. And, finally, margins matter -- a $50-100M software company can go public given it's 80-90% gross margins, an e-commerce company with 20-30% gross margins and high customer acquisition costs needs to be much bigger (probably 5-10x at least).

??? 3. Public Markets Distinguish Strong From Weak. It takes 6-12 months for public market investors to get "comfortable" with a newly-public company, and also for idiosyncratic factors like small float and insider lockups to work themselves out. We can have a healthy debate about what the multiples of rapidly growing software and Internet companies should be in absolute terms, but the public markets are very clearly distinguishing between the stronger and weaker businesses based on profit margins, growth, competitive advantages, etc.

???Bill Gurley's post last year does a great job analyzing why some businesses are valued at 10x+ revenue and most aren't. If you look at newly-public companies in the software and Internet sector you see a wide spread. As of this week, here's a sample of multiples:

????? LinkedIn (LNKD) – 16x+ trailing revenue

????? Zynga – 8x+ trailing revenue

????? Carbonite (CARB) – 3.4x trailing revenue

????? Active Network (ACTV) – 2.4x trailing revenue

????My point isn't that Active "should" be valued at 2.4x or Zynga "should" be over 8x or any other specific company is appropriately valued. Some tech IPOs have performed very strongly in the secondary market, others have struggled. But public market investors are clearly distinguishing between companies based on a variety of intrinsic and sector-specific factors and valuing recent IPOs pretty differently. This is a good thing for the overall health and sustainability of capital markets… it's bad for the ecosystem if all recently public companies go straight up or straight down.

??? 4. Post IPO Consistency is as Important as Ever - If your company's revenue and profitability are still quite unpredictable, you're probably better off staying private for now. Recently public companies that surprise to the downside are brutally punished. Hardly the only one but Pandora (P) was the latest to experience it this week with its earnings announcement for Q4 2011, the stock price dropping about 25% and well below the original IPO price of $16.