• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Facebook IPO: Nothing new learned

By
Dan Primack
Dan Primack
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Dan Primack
Dan Primack
Down Arrow Button Icon
November 29, 2011, 5:08 PM ET

Yesterday the Wall Street Journal got a huge amount of attention for reporting that Facebook is preparing to go public next year in an IPO that could value the company in excess of $100 billion. It became the top story on HuffingtonPost, and got prominent links/rewrites everywhere from Reuters to Drudge.

Huh? I’ve read the WSJ story several times, and can’t find any information that hasn’t been previously reported. The only exception would be that Facebook may raise $10 billion via the offering, but that’s a working figure that Biz Insider’s Nicholas Carson suggested back in May. In fact, much of the existing info comes from earlier articles in the… wait for it… Wall Street Journal!

Here’s a quick selection, which took approximately 19 minutes of research to compile:

  • January 3, 2011
    Associated Press: “Wedbush Morgan analyst Lou Kerner, who has been bullish on social media and Facebook in particular, says Facebook is well worth $50 billion… Kerner thinks the company could trade at $100 billion if it went public.”
  • March 17, 2011
    WSJ Venture Dispatch blog: “Judging by all the price talk out there, its valuation could be above $75 billion, maybe even $100 billion, by 2012 when it expects to hold its IPO.”
  • May 1, 2011
    WSJ: “Goldman’s and Digital Sky Technologies’ investment reported early this year was at a share price that implied a $50 billion valuation for Facebook. The people familiar with the company’s recent finances said they thought its profit was growing at a fast-enough clip to justify a valuation of $100 billion or more when it goes public.”
  • May 17, 2011
    Agence France Presse: “Morningstar IPO analyst Bill Buhr agrees that market appetite for social-media stocks is understandable, but not necessarily justified. ‘If you consider Facebook, for instance they’re talking about a $100 billion valuation.'”
  • May 25, 2011:
    Business Insider: “How big of a competitive advantage do Mark and Sheryl think it will be for Facebook to have $10 billion or so in cash available.”
  • June 13, 2011
    CNBC: “Facebook, the social-networking site that is one of the most closely-watched private companies in the world, is likely to go public by the first quarter of 2012, say people familiar with the matter, at a valuation that could be pegged at north of $100 billion.”
  • June 28, 2011
    WSJ Deal Journal blog: “Investment bankers have been knocking on Facebook Inc.’s Palo Alto doors for several months already, pitching their wares to the social networking company, ahead of an initial public offering. The event is expected to happen next spring at a possible valuation of $100 billion. Wall Street’s big banks all want a piece of it.”
  • July 14, 2011
    WSJ: “Today, transactions of Facebook stock on private marketplaces value it at about $84 billion. Some people believe that if Facebook goes public next year, it will trade at a $100 billion valuation”
  • September 14, 2011
    NY Times: “The company is still planning to go public in the first half of next year, people close to the matter said on Wednesday.”
  • November 18, 2011
    Business Insider: “A source close to Facebook employees emailed us yesterday to say that the rumor flitting from employee to employee is that ‘a Facebook S-1 filing is coming really soon. Possibly as soon as next month.'”

Moreover, yesterday’s story is explicitly indefinite. It says that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg “hasn’t made any final decisions,” nor has Facebook formally selected bankers. So what is new here?

Look, I understand the business value of a big “Facebook IPO” headline. It drives pageviews and gets link love from those who weren’t previously paying attention (and, yes, I recognize the irony of this very post). But could we put a moratorium on these sorts of stories until Facebook actually takes a specific step toward listing? Or, at the very least, stop hyping those who rehash old information.


Sign up for my daily email newsletter on deals and deal-makers: GetTermSheet.com

About the Author
By Dan Primack
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in

CryptoBinance
Binance has been proudly nomadic for years. A new announcement suggests it’s finally chosen a headquarters
By Ben WeissDecember 7, 2025
4 hours ago
Big TechStreaming
Trump warns Netflix-Warner deal may pose antitrust ‘problem’
By Hadriana Lowenkron, Se Young Lee and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
Big TechOpenAI
OpenAI goes from stock market savior to burden as AI risks mount
By Ryan Vlastelica and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
InvestingStock
What bubble? Asset managers in risk-on mode stick with stocks
By Julien Ponthus, Natalia Kniazhevich, Abhishek Vishnoi and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
Macron warns EU may hit China with tariffs over trade surplus
By James Regan and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
9 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
U.S. trade chief says China has complied with terms of trade deals
By Hadriana Lowenkron and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
9 hours ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
placeholder alt text
Politics
Supreme Court to reconsider a 90-year-old unanimous ruling that limits presidential power on removing heads of independent agencies
By Mark Sherman and The Associated PressDecember 7, 2025
17 hours ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.