????IPO期間分析師能做什么和不能做什么，這方面的規(guī)定充其量只能算是模棱兩可。按照傳統(tǒng)，IPO之后一個(gè)月左右，分析師才能著手研究本公司承銷(xiāo)的股票。不過(guò)，只要不公開(kāi)他們的研究結(jié)果，這些分析師就可以和投資者就IPO公司進(jìn)行私下交流，而這些投資者通常都是這些券商的頂級(jí)客戶(hù)。不過(guò)，這些分析師不能告訴后者他們最終會(huì)給IPO公司什么樣的評(píng)級(jí)，或者對(duì)評(píng)級(jí)水平做出暗示。就某些IPO公司來(lái)說(shuō)，透露收入預(yù)期也是違規(guī)行為。

????韋德布什證券公司（Wedbush Securities）負(fù)責(zé)研究社交媒體行業(yè)的分析師邁克爾?帕赫特說(shuō)：“分析師不能利用自己做出的評(píng)級(jí)?！?帕赫特在Facebook上市前就開(kāi)始研究這家公司。盡管韋德布什證券公司沒(méi)有參加Twitter的承銷(xiāo)工作，但他決定不對(duì)Twitter的收入情況作出預(yù)測(cè)?！皠e人可能覺(jué)得收入預(yù)期屬于灰色地帶數(shù)據(jù)，但我們公司認(rèn)為它是禁區(qū)?！?/p>

????具有諷刺意味的是，雖然備受非議，但去年通過(guò)的《創(chuàng)業(yè)企業(yè)扶助法》（JOBS Act）有可能解決這個(gè)和研究IPO公司有關(guān)的問(wèn)題。具體來(lái)說(shuō)，這項(xiàng)法律允許分析師研究尚未首發(fā)上市的公司，甚至包括為承銷(xiāo)商工作的分析師。這樣就能消除信息方面的不對(duì)稱(chēng)情況，原因是如果將某家公司納入研究范圍，分析師就得向所有人公開(kāi)他們的研究成果。也許就是出于這個(gè)原因，還沒(méi)有哪家華爾街大公司利用過(guò)《創(chuàng)業(yè)企業(yè)扶助法》的這項(xiàng)規(guī)定。

????承銷(xiāo)商WR Hambrecht正在倡導(dǎo)更為透明的IPO過(guò)程，該公司創(chuàng)始人比爾?昂布雷克特說(shuō)：“在IPO過(guò)程中，華爾街公司壟斷著相關(guān)信息，而且它們打算繼續(xù)維持這樣的局面。設(shè)置靜默期很愚蠢?！?/p>

????對(duì)此我們無(wú)比贊同。

????譯者：Charlie

????The rules around what analysts can and can't do during an IPO are murky at best. Traditionally, analysts at underwriting firms don't pick up coverage of a stock their bank is underwriting until a month or so after the IPO. Still, analysts are allowed to talk to investors, typically the firm's top-paying clients, privately about the deals, as long as they don't publish their research. However, they are not allowed to tell them how they will eventually rate a company's stock, or hint at what that rating will be. For some, revenue projections cross the line.

????"You are not allowed to front-run your own rating," says Michael Pachter, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, who follows social media companies, and began covering Facebook before it went public. He has decided not to put out revenue projections on Twitter, though Wedbush is not one of Twitter's underwriters. "You might feel a revenue projection falls into the grey area, but my firm's opinion is it's off-limits."

????Ironically, the much maligned JOBS Act, which was passed last year, could solve the IPO research problem. The JOBS Act specifically allows analysts to pick up coverage of a company before it goes IPO, even if they work for one of the underwriters. That would remove the information divide, because once an analyst picks up coverage they have to publish their research for everyone to see. That could be why none of the big Wall Street firms have taken advantage of this provision in the JOBS Act.

????"The Wall Street firms have a monopoly on information in the IPO process, and they're trying to hold on to it," says Bill Hambrecht of WR Hambrecht, an underwriting firm pushing for a more open IPO process. "The quiet period is stupid."

????We couldn't agree more.