Quite right, and a weakness of the original article is it doesn't make it clear how closely connected the "sales representatives" clamouring for repeat business were to the original IPO.

I'm intrigued by the possibility that an individual person closely connected with pricing the IPO might have expressed a view akin to: "we've got to set a sub-market price to ensure our institutional investors make a killing on the first day, because this stock will be in trouble once the hype dies down"

But still, that was over a decade ago, and I'm sure no investment banker would ever be so cynical today...