So it means that the market values the company $11bn higher that the investment bankers from Glodman Sachs who conducted the twitter IPO.
The question is did the IPO bankers discount the company by $11bn just because they are dumb or simply because they are altruistic and want everyone but themselves to make money on this IPO? Or could it be that the market overreacts?
Well you can say many things about Golman Sachs, but their IPO bankers are surely not dumb and if they see a way to double their bonuses they will surely take it instead of letting someone else in the market grab all the gains.
Therefore my best guess is that once again the market is completely overreacting because twitter is "such a cool company". The truth is: twitter is a cool company that does not make money, and in finance this fact alone does not justifies that the firm should be valued at such astronomic levels...