I found this in another group and thought I would share
Today, more than 50 people have made a submission to the Royal Commission that IPOs should be fair to retail investors. We need 300 submissions (a few bullet points is sufficient), as there has only been five hundred lodged in total, according to the media. Read on to find out how 5 minutes of your time can make a difference - and get you access to all future IPOs in Australia.
Retail investors are locked out of 66% of IPOs (by number, and >95% by value). This should not be allowed. Singapore and Hong Kong both guarantee a % of every IPO is reserved for the public. Australia has no protections for small investors.
Current market practice is that large, profitable businesses are 'pre-sold' to institutional investors, and sometimes a small number of HNW investors get a small allocation. Only risky, small IPOs are offered to retail investors, while those same investors are locked out of large IPOs. This is a perverse public policy.
Lodge online at https://royalcommissionwebform.lawinorder.com.au/#/
or email [email protected]
These are the key points (please use your own words):
• the public has a reasonable expectation that initial public offerings will be made available to the public
• why are IPOs not subject to “market integrity” rules, requiring them to be conducted fairly, transparently and efficiently?
• allocations based on secret commissions (brokerage) paid by institutions to lead managers should not be allowed – this is not allowed in trading, why is it still allowed in IPOs?
• IPOs of large, profitable companies, should not be pre-sold to institutions before the prospectus is lodged, denying the public the opportunity to apply
• It is not good public policy to deny the public access to large IPOs, while expecting small investors to fund riskier, smaller IPOs
• Hong Kong and Singapore both have laws guaranteeing a minimum allocation to the public; why doesn’t Australia?
• Why can IPOs be selectively offered on the basis of secret commissions…and why is this not banned for the same reasons as insider trading?
• Why is it acceptable that the public rightly believes that some people get special treatment in IPOs? How is this good public policy?
• How does allowing some people to be excluded, while others are given special treatment, build trust that the sharemarket is fair?
Please respond letting me know that you've lodged, so we know how many people have complained and can get the media onto it.
