It's hard to tell which of the following is more tiresome - the Groupon management team and its prima donna pricing antics, the investment bankers at Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and UBS whose actions appear dictated by their blind pursuit of fees, or business media who report on a daily feast of urgencies surrounding the offering. Take for example, 2 associate accounting professors from B-schools in Pennsylvania - one from Villanova, the other from Penn State.   They question whether Groupon's “business model” is really anything more than a half-baked plan.  While CEO Andrew Mason makes a compelling argument for how the company delivers customer and merchant value, he's less convincing explaining how Groupon will deliver value at an appropriate cost, and actually make money. They also note that Mr. Mason readily admits that low barriers to entry pose a significant challenge to Groupon’s ability to successfully execute its strategy - thousands of competitors that deliver similar products.  He dismisses the issue by saying “the proof is in the numbers.” And Have You Looked at the Numbers? Over the last few months, Groupon has raised serious concerns about the reliability of its numbers in a series of well-publicized financial reporting miscues.  In August, the SEC required the company to amend its registration statement for its use of the controversial “Acsoi” metric, which understated operating losses by $120 million by excluding noncash expenses and online marketing expenses.  In September, the SEC forced another registration statement amendment, this time to correct the company’s method of reporting revenue.  Here, Groupon was caught inflating revenue by $400 million in 2010. An Urgency to Price, or an Air of Desperation? The professors are also troubled by the rush to price the shares on Thursday and begin trading on Friday.  It's not apparent what that's all about, especially since the planned offering has been pared down to about 5% of outstanding shares.  The rush to go public, in anticipation that the Company's diminished valuations will return to previous astronomical levels, makes little sense. Is there something lurking behind the scenes of which we are unaware?  Why not wait until the markets stabilize and the company gets its financial reporting house in order?  If all is well and the company has a viable long-term model, doesn’t it make sense to wait until the market can better value the company? Investment Bankers' Role. Might it be that the rush to go public has been driven by the bankers - MS, GS, CS - who seek to collect their fee (which is tied to the market value of the stock issued) before the company’s value drops further?  After all, Groupon's estimated value has plunged to a range of $10-11 billion from an estimated $20 billion (didn't we hear $30 billion along the way?).  There also could be a loss of face if the bankers are unable to get the deal done. See that, we already went over our quota of time and words we had planned to allocate to the Groupon IPO.  Guess the fever is highly contagious. To read the professors' complete discussion, go to:   [Dealbook, 11/1/11, "Another View: Can Groupon’s I.P.O. Be Saved?"].