To echo my colleague Tara Seals, there’s just really no good economic news to discuss. Two (more) reasons I say that ... Standard & Poor’s today released an article on the rise in corporate defaults, and PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) earlier this week published a report on the absence of any venture capital-backed IPOs in the second quarter.
First, the S&P data. The article doesn’t pin any specific industry to the wall but notes there were nine U.S. defaults in September, bringing the year-to-date total to 61. Yes, the nine include Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual and their subsidiaries. But what’s really disturbing is this little gem: “This easily exceeds the combined 16 and 22 defaults in full-years 2007 and 2006, respectively.”
Presumably none of these defaults happened in telecom/tech – we would have heard about them were that the case. But that doesn’t mean the credit crunch isn’t hitting us where it hurts. I know I’ve pointed this out several times in the past couple of days, but AT&T Inc. is having a very hard time selling its short-term debt (read Tara’s excellent blog on this). That scares me because if AT&T is facing this difficulty, what happens to smaller industry companies like PAETEC, XO, Vonage and on and on?
Now for the PWC study. The venture-capital backed IPO market is at a 30-year low. Thirty years. The second quarter of 2008 marked the first time since 1978 there’ve been zero, nada, zilch VC-backed IPOs in a given quarter, PWC said. That means VCs will own companies longer and there will be fewer IPOs over the next few years, the firm found.
Still, those IPOs should be larger than ever. PWC said that’s because complying with regulatory requirements such as Sarbanes-Oxley is expensive. On top of that, “VCs will likely face more pressure to grow IPO candidates big enough to succeed in a more rigorous and expensive IPO process.” That could be good or not-so-good, it seems to me. Good because who wouldn’t want a gargantuan IPO à la Google’s? Bad because it seems there has to be a point of no return or of diminishing returns ... once we cross a certain threshold, is it possible to exceed it? I’m thinking unrealistic hopes and expectations, particularly if this dismal market doesn’t bounce back any time soon. I’m no economist (a terrible profession for someone who had to take college algebra twice), so I hope I’m making sense here. Any economists out there, feel free to chime in.
Anyway. Like the rest of you, surely, I’m way off-balance from watching the stock market zip all over the place these past few days. Wish we could say it’s going to get better by next week ... but that would be unrealistic.