Aug 1 2017, 03:14 PM
QUOTE(CcL @ Jul 16 2017, 08:13 AM)
You forget the continuous cost of being listed - monetary and strict guidelines.
Plus one cannot compare LEAP to the 10% example of funding cost of Main or Ace and think it is still a good deal. It is still not "listed" as it is not accessible to everyone. You are still illiquid and at the mercy of Bursa and SC.
My point is that for LEAP, cost has to be much lower, there is no guarantee there will be takers for your IPO and likely no underwriters. Sure you can say you want to raise 10m for 1m cost, but can any SME looking to raise 10m be able to afford to BURN 1m if the thing fails (i.e. no one subscribes or you get only 1m fresh funds)?
Agree bro.Plus one cannot compare LEAP to the 10% example of funding cost of Main or Ace and think it is still a good deal. It is still not "listed" as it is not accessible to everyone. You are still illiquid and at the mercy of Bursa and SC.
My point is that for LEAP, cost has to be much lower, there is no guarantee there will be takers for your IPO and likely no underwriters. Sure you can say you want to raise 10m for 1m cost, but can any SME looking to raise 10m be able to afford to BURN 1m if the thing fails (i.e. no one subscribes or you get only 1m fresh funds)?
If the paid out to advisors and underwriters is ~10%, then IPO would be their last resort after exhausting other options. Future cost to maintain a board and annual audit will stack up another 10% or so in several years.
Quote
0.0180sec
0.93
6 queries
GZIP Disabled