Mamaearth IPO oversubscribed, Ashneer Grover slams "Twitter pundits"

'Mamaearth IPO oversubscribed, Ashneer Grover slams

Recently Mamaearth IPO was opened, which closed on 2 November. Although all the experts related to IPO and stock market were considering the company as overvalued and were comparing it with Paytm, but this IPO has been subscribed about 7.6 times.

Recently Mamaearth IPO was opened, which closed on 2 November. Although all the experts related to IPO and stock market were considering the company as overvalued and were comparing it with Paytm, but this IPO has been subscribed about 7.6 times. On this, former co-founder of BharatPe, Ashneer Grover has said some important things on social media regarding this IPO. He congratulated the co-founders of the startup on the IPO being so heavily subscribed and also told that he too has secretly invested money in this IPO. Let us tell you that the Gurugram-based beauty and personal care company was founded in 2016 by husband-wife duo Varun Alagh and Ghazal Alagh. It started with the Mamaearth brand. The company's shares will be listed on BSE and NSE.

Ashneer Grover wrote on Twitter- 'Congratulations to Varun Alagh and Ghazal Alagh of Mamaearth for getting the company's IPO 8 times over-subscribed!! Also, kudos for proving all the Twitter IPO pundits/valuation experts wrong and silencing them in style!!' Along with this, Ashneer put a disclaimer and wrote - 'I have invested money in this IPO secretly and handsomely - Dissing it on Twitter (Mama means calling the IPO good or bad) does not make money, subscribing to the IPO. Can also become!'

What is being said about the IPO?

The biggest debate on social media regarding Mamaearth's IPO was regarding valuation. The debate was on the fact that the company is launching an IPO at a very high valuation, in such a situation it could prove to be the second Paytm. Many questions were being raised regarding the company's business, because the company's margins are very low and returning users are also very less. Questions were being raised that the company was spending too much on marketing and doing business on that basis.