Angie's List aims for $66 million with public offering

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Consumer review website Angie's List Inc. said Wednesday that it expects to raise roughly $66.4 million with its initial public offering and price its shares between $11 and $13.

The Indianapolis company's shares will trade on NASDAQ under the ticker symbol ANGI.

Angie's List first announced the planned offering in August and said at the time that it hoped to raise up to $75 million.

The company said in the latest filing that expects to sell 6.25 million shares, with about 2.5 million to be sold by current stockholders. The company won't get any of the money from the shares sold by current stockholders.

The offering could raise as much as $81.1 million if its underwriters exercise their option to sell extra shares.

The company said it will use the money for advertising to get new members, and for general corporate purposes.

Angie's List said it plans to continue aggressively investing in national advertising to deepen its market penetration, particularly in New York and Los Angeles. It has also said it is expanding into new categories. It started by focusing on home improvement services, and now covers categories such as health and car restoration.

As IBJ reported Tuesday, Angie's List lost $43.2 million in the first nine months of this year, a 59-percent increase over the same time period of 2010.


  • Mayor's Buddies
    Use it for Advertising... That is comforting if you are an investor.

    This company is about as useful as a Thick Yellow Page Phone Book v. Someone simply going the business online.

    This business model is highly flawed and is rich in the red. So blown away that Mitch and his buddy Ballard are giving $ so this failed business model can buy real estate? IF I AM AN INVESTOR MY FIRST QUESTION IS WHY OWN THE REAL ESTATE NOW AT THIS POINT.

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.