Usually, fund companies and channels will make preparations for publicity in advance and focus on promoting products in the scheduled schedule. Fund companies will also cooperate accordingly. For example, sometimes foundations lower their positions in advance to stabilize their net worth.
The fund's "second initial public offering" is usually not as high as the initial public offering, but the fund has real performance ahead, so it is not so difficult to promote it, and it is also a good choice, especially for some funds that have been operating for a long time, which look very attractive and have real performance.
Extended data
The biggest difference between "second IPO" and "IPO" is that the funds with "second IPO" are all old funds. Except for those who started the "second initial public offering" within half a year of its establishment, most of them are operating normally. If these normal funds temporarily reduce their positions in order to give newcomers a chance to get on the bus smoothly, they will easily be dumped by the "high-speed rail" in the market.
On the other hand, the "second IPO" usually brings a considerable new scale to the fund, which is not uncommon to be several times the original size of the fund. In this way, the position of the old fund will be passively reduced, and it is difficult to quickly increase the position. After all, it takes time to build a position. This will also lead to unstable fund operation.
The smooth operation of the fund is the responsibility of the fund manager. If the "second initial public offering" causes the fact that it cannot operate smoothly, it is easy to cause disputes among investors.
After the "second IPO", the market is not good, and the old holders will be luckier, but I believe I will not thank the fund company for its "second IPO"; The market is so good, it is estimated that the old holder will "scold" and "enlarge my fund" and delay my making money.