Nickname: flight750

Review: I think the firefighter's story says it all: First, he tries to reserve 100 shares in May. Then, he checks to see if he got them on May 23, and "was upset and called to complain" because he didn't see he allocated any shares. Then, he says he would have paid for them "... If I had bought the shares". As I see it, HE DID buy shares and demonstrated that decision when he called to complain! But now that it's not looking so good, he's "history" if they make him pay up.

Date reviewed: Jun 9, 2006 4:24 PM

Nickname: fsk

Review: The ultimate lesson here is that individual investors should stay away from IPOs. Leave IPOs to the professional traders. If it's a good company, you should still be able to buy it one to two years after the IPO. If the valuation is inappropriate, buy something else. There are always plenty of stocks that are perceived as "hot," so there's no huge risk in missing out on an IPO.

Date reviewed: Jun 8, 2006 1:21 PM

Nickname: nosnojo

Review: My issue is there was no process, instruction, or contact information on how to sell the shares. My intention was to watch and if the shares lost more than 5% after the opening bell, dump them. When calling the customer care line for Deutsche Bank, I was told they had no clue. Yes, you roll the dice and take your lumps, but if I had bought through my normal broker, my losses would have been capped at 5%.

Date reviewed: Jun 3, 2006 2:43 PM

Nickname: Randyt

Review: What people sometimes don't understand is that VoIP is free.

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 11:50 PM

Nickname: D

Review: I don't know if anyone else did any research but in the IPO Prospectus filed by Vonage with the SEC there were specific warnings saying the price of the stock was likely to drop due to "dilution." "Accordingly, if you purchase shares of our common stock in this offering you will suffer immediate dilution of $14.22 per share in pro forma net tangible book value. This dilution is due, in large part, to the fact that our earlier investors paid substantially less than the initial public offering price when they purchased their shares of our capital stock and the losses we have incurred. You may suffer additional dilution to the extent outstanding warrants to purchase shares of our common stock are exercised. If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, the pro forma net tangible book value per share of common stock would be approximately $3.17 and the dilution in pro forma net tangible book value per share of common stock to new investors would be $13.83. "

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 10:21 PM

Nickname: georgie

Review: Can't see this stock going back up at all with the major cable companies charging forward with the same services at a much lower cost per subscriber.

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 10:11 PM

Nickname: jonb

Review: Underwriting a money losing company is silly. Reserving shares on a money losing company and hoping to cash in is unsophisticated, to say the least. Most important, Joes and Janes had no chance to get any shares in profitable IPOs. Like they say, when it's too good to be true.......

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 9:57 PM

Nickname: joeprendy

Review: Rosenbush thinks all of Vonage's customers are going to quit. You can't beat V's phone service for price, especially. Vonage is a great product.

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 7:26 PM

Nickname: RalphyBoy

Review: Vonage appears to have done a number on subscribers who were impressed with the service but never considered the business case. Tough to make money when you clearly pour every dime into acquisition at a time when the industry is finding ways to give service away for free. Investors just have to suck it up and pay.

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 5:19 PM

Nickname: Kam

Review: First off: you committed to something you follow through. The only "confusion" is slimeballs trying to weasel out of a deal that no longer looked like a free pass to wealth. That said, I can now see the lawyers circling around the drowning Vonage :) All these deep pocketed underwriters are now going to get hammered for "blatant" misrepresentation of the value of the company as evidenced by the 29% discreptancy between the Market's valuation and their "pie in the sky" IPO valuation.

Date reviewed: Jun 1, 2006 4:59 PM