Only two weeks ago, local-deal start-up Groupon was acclaimed as an unprecedented eCommerce success and its IPO was as hotly anticipated as Facebook‘s. Since then, however, Groupon’s S1-Filing disclosed a cumulated $540 million loss on a cumulated $1.4 billion Gross Transaction Value. Suddenly, all love for the eCommerce posterchild seems lost and every aspect of the business is slashed. I believe critics should have been wiser earlier and the investment bankers who hyped up Groupon are to blame.
Bertolt Brecht Picture from Bundesarchiv Source Wikipedia
“Do not let anybody put you on a pedestal because once people realize you’re just human, it’s you that they destroy, not the image they created”. Groupon’s CEO Andrew Mason should probably meditate this thought from German author Bertolt Brecht.
Andrew Mason and Groupon, the company he co-founded in 2008, became the talk of the town after the company raised $135 million in April 2010 and, even more so, after it raised a whopping $950 million in January this year. With over 80 million online subscribers in more than 40 countries, Groupon dominates the booming local deal market it has contributed to create. Until recently, most observers were in awe. To name but one example of the Groupon-groupies: Last August Groupon was described by Forbes as the “fastest-growing company in Web history” and “what the dot-com boom was supposed to be all about“.
Well, now it seems that Groupon is rather exactly was the dot-com bust was about: a completely inflated valuation. Since Groupon has released its S1-Filing and revealed a cumulated loss of $540 million, criticism is raining on every aspect of the business. Worse, the critics are among the most influential voices in finance and eCommerce: Bloomberg, The Street, Marketwatch, The Economist, the FT, the Wall Street Journal, thisismoney.co.uk, Huffington Post, TechCrunch and more.
Below I review the 5 most critical points why Groupon is overvalued: 1) Inflated revenue and income; 2) Lack of merchant and customer lock-in; 3) Bad deal for private IPO investors; 4) Leadership flaws; and, most importantly, 5) Lack of financial value multiplier Read more