/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Poshmark's market cap is now $1.4B, a 50%+ drop from its January IPO, as revenue growth slowed to 16% in Q3, down from 42% in Q1, amid Apple's privacy changes

The Information Malique Morris

Context & Ripple Effects

Poshmark's slide is a round trip of its own IPO froth: after confidentially filing in late 2020, it priced at $42 a share — above its original range — and then opened more than 130% higher on day one, briefly valuing it above $3B. The S-1 that justified that enthusiasm showed 28% revenue growth and profitability on 31.7M active users.

Ten months later the math has inverted: growth has fallen from 42% in Q1 to 16% in Q3, with Apple's privacy changes cited as a contributing factor, and the market cap sits at $1.4B — below even the $2.9B top-of-range valuation from the January filing.

First-order effects

  • Investors who bought into the $42 IPO pricing are down more than half, and Poshmark now trades below the valuation its own filing range implied before the pop.
  • Apple's privacy changes have moved from an abstract platform risk to a named driver of Poshmark's decelerating revenue growth, directly hitting a company whose user acquisition ran through iOS advertising.

Second-order effects

  • Any consumer marketplace still underwriting growth on paid iOS acquisition faces the same repricing: the 2021-vintage premium for 'profitable, high-growth resale' collapses once the ad-driven growth engine behind those numbers is impaired.
  • Future marketplace IPOs must price against post-privacy-change unit economics rather than the pre-change growth curves their S-1s show, pressuring bankers and issuers to discount projections the way Poshmark's were implicitly discounted by the market.

Third-order effects

  • A single platform's privacy policy is becoming a systemic valuation variable for consumer internet companies: when Apple changes data access, the growth rates — and hence market caps — of entire cohorts of ad-acquired businesses move with it.
  • Marketplaces may respond by shifting spend toward owned channels and retention, structurally favoring platforms with organic, community-driven discovery over those built on purchased installs.

The trend: Platform-level privacy decisions are turning into a macro force that reprices consumer-internet growth stocks, exposing which marketplaces actually own their customer relationships.

Discussion

  • @tehlike Tuna Toksoz on x
    @StevenLoi @Carnage4Life Apple.
  • @stevenloi Steven Loi on x
    @Carnage4Life who wins?
  • @btsavage Ben Savage on x
    “Data such as an iPhone's remaining battery and screen brightness (both accurate to 15 decimals), or an iPad's remaining free space (down to the byte), serve no legitimate, non-fingerprinting purpose for most apps.”
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    2/ Other channels can attribute installs in real-time because MMPs allow advertisers to opt into “probabilistic install attribution using device parameters” (PIAUDP), and those channels mostly optimize to installs, anyway. No impact to campaign measurement from ATT
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    @btsavage Yup https://twitter.com/...
  • @btsavage Ben Savage on x
    The part of this report about how easy it is to just tell Kochava or AppsFlyer to just violate Apple's ATT policy was pretty damning... https://blog.lockdownprivacy.com/ ...
  • @carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
    Poshmark gets hit by second order effects as ramification of Apple's privacy changes ripple across the industry. As ads get less relevant it's not just advertising based apps like Snapchat or Facebook that get hit but also advertisers like Poshmark. Oops. https://www.theinformati…
  • @luxeoflique Malique Morris on x
    Poshmark has built a massive user base with its social media features. But most of its users don't buy goods on its marketplace. Is this a harbinger for what emerging social shopping startups will face as they scale? My latest for The Information: https://www.theinformation.com/ …
  • @theinformation @theinformation on x
    The social shopping sector is exploding, and Poshmark should be benefiting—instead, the company is facing slowing revenue growth, causing concern about the social shopping business model. https://www.theinformation.com/ ...
  • @sarthakgh Sar Haribhakti on x
    “When Poshmark went public in January, it was riding a wave of lockdown-boosted growth. Rivals like ThredUp and The RealReal both suffered a shortage of inventory during the lockdowns.” Postmark stock down more than 50%. Got hit by Apple changes too https://www.theinformation.com…