????上周,，摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）首席執(zhí)行官詹姆斯?戈?duì)柭Q(chēng)那些在Facebook公司IPO時(shí)購(gòu)買(mǎi)股票,，并期待股價(jià)一飛沖天的人“非常幼稚”。但現(xiàn)在看來(lái),，在這家社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)公司的股票上下注并賭輸了的人,，不僅僅是個(gè)人投資者。華爾街也投下了重注,。

????上周五,，瑞銀集團(tuán)（UBS）證實(shí)，在Facebook公司IPO后數(shù)日內(nèi)交易該公司股票的行為,，讓這家瑞士銀行蒙受損失,。瑞銀并未透露具體的損失金額。但《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》和美國(guó)全國(guó)廣播公司財(cái)經(jīng)頻道（CNBC）估計(jì)瑞銀的損失額為3.5億美元,，進(jìn)而使其成為Facebook上市發(fā)行以來(lái)最大的輸家,。市場(chǎng)人士最初估計(jì)華爾街因交易Facebook股票大約虧損1億美元左右,，但在過(guò)去一周左右的時(shí)間里，一些分析人士把這一數(shù)據(jù)翻了一番,。再加上瑞銀集團(tuán)此前未予披露的損失,，華爾街因Facebook上市發(fā)行而蒙受的損失可能超過(guò)5億美元。

????作為一家做市商,，像其他中介商一樣,，瑞銀集團(tuán)一直在竭力幫助其客戶(hù)獲得Facebook股票。但很難想象,，僅僅為其他人購(gòu)買(mǎi)和出售這只股票會(huì)讓瑞銀損失如此巨額的資金,。瑞銀表示，該公司試圖出售此前以35美元的價(jià)位購(gòu)買(mǎi)的Facebook股票,，但最終僅以低于30美元的價(jià)格售出了其持有的部分股票,。

????Facebook股票的上市開(kāi)盤(pán)價(jià)為42美元。因此,，假設(shè)瑞銀在開(kāi)盤(pán)當(dāng)日購(gòu)買(mǎi)了這只股票（瑞銀并非這筆交易的承銷(xiāo)商,，因此無(wú)法享受優(yōu)惠價(jià)格），并以30美元的均價(jià)售出,，這家銀行將遭受每股12美元的損失,。將這一數(shù)據(jù)與3.5億美元的總損失額進(jìn)行比較就可估算出，瑞銀集團(tuán)在Facebook上市當(dāng)日購(gòu)買(mǎi)了逾2,900萬(wàn)股股票,。這意味著,，瑞銀集團(tuán)下注12億美元，賭Facebook的IPO大獲成功,。這一下注額是根據(jù)30美元的出售均價(jià)計(jì)算出的,。如果瑞銀出售Facebook股票的均價(jià)是35美元（這種可能性更大一些），該公司在這支股票上下的賭注就有可能高達(dá)21億美元,。

????瑞銀購(gòu)買(mǎi)的某些股票可能是為該公司認(rèn)為有購(gòu)買(mǎi)意向,、但最終沒(méi)有購(gòu)買(mǎi)的客戶(hù)準(zhǔn)備的。但更大的可能是,，很大一部分股票是由該公司某位或許多猜測(cè)Facebook股價(jià)將一飛沖天,，試圖粉飾其帳薄的交易員購(gòu)買(mǎi)的,。

????瑞銀集團(tuán)表示,，它的損失是交易故障所致，該公司正在考慮起訴納斯達(dá)克股票交易所（Nasdaq）,。但納斯達(dá)克方面聲稱(chēng),，它已經(jīng)仔細(xì)審查了每筆Facebook股票交易的細(xì)節(jié)，只發(fā)現(xiàn)了4千萬(wàn)損失可以歸結(jié)為交易所的問(wèn)題,。當(dāng)然,，納斯達(dá)克很可能低報(bào)了損失金額，但這一數(shù)字也不可能高出了10倍。即使假定可歸結(jié)為納斯達(dá)克問(wèn)題的實(shí)際損失額在兩個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)之間（比如,，2億美元）,，那依然意味著華爾街投下重注，賭Facebook股價(jià)飆升,。

????Last week, Morgan Stanley's CEO James Gorman called those who had bought shares in Facebook's IPO expecting it to pop "naive." But it now appears it wasn't just individual investors who gambled on the social network's shares and lost. Wall Street was all-in as well.

????Late Friday, Swiss bank UBS confirmed that it, too, had lost money trading Facebook's shares in the days after the company's IPO. The bank wouldn't say how much. But theWall Street Journal and CNBC put the loss at $350 million, making it the largest Facebook loser so far by far. Originally, Wall Street's Facebook trading loss was estimated to be around $100 million. But in the past week or so, some were putting it at double that. Add in UBS's previous unknown losses and Wall Street's Facebook hit could be more than half a billion.

????UBS is a market maker, and like other brokers was trying to help its clients get Facebook's (FB) stock. But it's hard to believe that UBS (UBS) could lose this much money just buying and selling the stock for others. The company said it tried to sell the Facebook shares it had bought at $35, but ended up exiting some of its shares at below $30.

????Facebook's shares opened at $42. So if you assume that UBS bought at the open - it wasn't an underwriter on the deal so no preferred pricing - and sold at an average $30, that would give the bank a per share loss of $12. Compare that to a total loss of $350 million, and what you get is that UBS bought just over 29 million shares of Facebook on the day of its IPO. Meaning UBS bet $1.2 billion that Facebook's IPO would pop. And that's if it got out at an average $30. If UBS instead sold at an average of $35, more likely, then the firm's bet on the stock could have been as big as $2.1 billion.

????Some of that buying could have been for clients who the firm assumed would want to buy, but never materialized. But more likely a good chunk of it was by some trader at the firm, or many, who tried to goose their book on the assumption that Facebook's IPO would shoot up.

????UBS says that it suffered its losses because of glitches, and that it is considering suing the Nasdaq. But Nasdaq says it has gone over every Facebook trade in detail, and that it has only found $40 million in losses that can be attributed to problems at the exchange. Of course, it's likely that Nasdaq is low-balling. But it's unlikely that its figure is off by a factor of ten. And even if you assume the actual amount attributable to Nasdaq is some where in the middle, say $200 million, it still means that Wall Street firms placed huge bets that Facebook's IPO would soar.