Lyft, the ride-hailing startup that is gearing up for an initial public offering later this week, will reportedly price shares higher than the initial range due to strong demand on the part of investors.
According to a report in The Wall Street Journal citing people familiar with the deal, Lyft told some investors during its road show that it is likely pricing shares in its IPO higher than the range of US$62 to US$68 a share. The paper noted it’s unclear how much higher shares will be priced late Thursday (March 28). The Wall Street Journal did say it’s not likely to be as high as US$80 a share, but more likely in the low US$70s a share. Shares of Lyft will begin trading as a public company Friday, March 29. If it does price its shares higher, the ride-hailing startup could have a valuation of more than US$23 billion, which is at the high end of the previous target. If Lyft was to price it above US$81.60 a share, it would have to file paperwork with the new range with the SEC.
Lyft and rival Uber are both going public this year, garnering a lot of attention from investors. Lyft has been drawing standing room only crowds to its road show, noted the WSJ. While there is a lot of interest in Lyft, there are also concerns about its lack of profitability. It will hold the record as having the most losses of a startup going public in the twelve months leading up to the IPO, reported the paper, citing S&P Global Market Intelligence. Lyft had losses of US$911 million in 2018.
The interest and excitement surrounding the Lyft IPO, even with the losses, should bode well for other startups gearing up to tap the public markets. Pinterest filed its IPO paperwork with the Securities Exchange Commission late last week with an eye toward an IPO in April, while Uber is expected to start its IPO process in the next few weeks.
Full Content: PYMNTS
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Massachusetts AG Sues Insulin Makers and PBMs Over Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Apple and Amazon Avoid Mass Lawsuit in UK Over Alleged Collusion
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Top Agent Network Drops Antitrust Suit Against National Association of Realtors
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Weil, Gotshal & Manges Strengthens Antitrust Practice with New Partner
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Russian Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Google for Non-Compliance with Content Removal Orders
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand