Who are the active investors? : Evidence from venture capital

This paper examines the determinants and consequences of investor activism in venture capital. Using a hand-collected sample of European venture capital deals, it shows the importance of human capital. Venture capital firms with partners that have prior business experience are more active recruiting managers and directors, helping with fundraising, and interacting more frequently with their portfolio companies. Independent venture capital firms are also more active than ‘captive’ (bank-, corporate-, or government-owned) firms. After controlling for endogeneity, investor activism is shown to be positively related to the success of portfolio companies.     

CARE Conference Hong Kong Polytechnic University,June 9, 2014: Equity Financing for Early‐Stage Companies in China

Many of the smaller private‐sector Chinese companies in their entrepreneurial growth stage are now being funded by Chinese venture capital (VC) and private equity (PE) firms. In contrast to western VC markets, where institutional investors such as pension funds and endowments have been the main providers of capital, in China most capital for domestic funds has come from private business owners and high net worth individuals. As relatively new players in the market who are less accustomed to entrusting their capital to fund managers for a lengthy period of time, Chinese VCs and their investors have shown a shorter investment horizon and demanded a faster return of capital and profits. In an attempt to explain this behavior, Paul Gompers and Josh Lerner of Harvard Business School have offered a “grandstanding hypothesis” that focuses on the incentives of younger, less established VCs to push their portfolio companies out into the IPO market as early as they can—and thus possibly prematurely—to establish a track record and facilitate future fundraising. This explanation is supported by the under‐performance of Chinese VC‐backed IPOs that has been documented by the author's recent research. Although they continue to offer significant opportunities for global investors, China's VC and PE markets still face many challenges. The supervisory system and legal environment need further improvement, and Chinese funds need to find a way to attract more institutional investors—a goal that can and likely will be promoted through government inducements.     

The interaction between product market and financing strategy: the role of venture capital

Venture capital financing is widely believed to be influentialfor new innovative companies. We provide empirical evidencethat venture capital financing is related to product marketstrategies and outcomes of start-ups. Using a unique hand-collecteddatabase of Silicon Valley high-tech start-ups. Using a uniquehand-collected database of Silicon Valley high-tech start-upswe find that innovator firms are more likely to obtain venturecapital than imitator firms. Venture capital is also associatedwith a significant reduction in the time to bring a productto market, especially for innovators. Our results suggest significantinterrelations between investor types and product market dimensions,and a role of venture capital for innovative companies.     

Does venture capital investment enhance corporate innovation? Evidence from Korea

We examine whether venture capital (VC) investment enhances corporate innovation in Korea. Using a matched sample of 802 firms from 1998 to 2012, we find that after the first round of VC investment, VC-backed firms are more innovative than non-VC-backed firms. Our results suggest that the positive influence of VC investment largely comes from the ability of VC firms to reduce information asymmetry between investors and ventures: VC funds managed by independent venture capitalists significantly enhance corporate innovation, whereas those managed by governmental venture capitalists do not. Furthermore, this positive influence becomes more pronounced where there is greater information asymmetry. Finally, we show that funds with profit-based compensation structures are more likely to encourage corporate innovation than those with fee-based compensation structures.     

Are family and friends the wrong investors? Evidence from U.S. start-ups

This paper investigates the effects of funding from family and friends (i.e., informal funding) on subsequent access to venture capital for start-up firms. We retrieve information on financing activity of young U.S. firms from a novel dataset based on private placements filings (Form Ds). To address potential endogeneity issues, we use an instrument that hinges on the family size of founders as an exogenous constraint on the supply of informal funds. Our results show that informal finance significantly reduces the probability of future financing events. We provide suggestive evidence that this is due to conflicts of interests between informal stakeholders and professional investors.     

Optimal Investment,Monitoring, and the Staging of Venture Capital

This paper examines the structure of staged venture capital investments when agency and monitoring costs exist. Expected agency costs increase as assets become less tangible, growth options increase, and asset specificity rises. Data from a random sample of 794 venture capital-backed firms support the predictions. Venture capitalists concentrate investments in early stage and high technology companies where informational asymmetries are highest. Decreases in industry ratios of tangible assets to total assets, higher market-to-book ratios, and greater R&D intensities lead to more frequent monitoring. Venture capitalists periodically gather information and maintain the option to discontinue funding projects with little probability of going public.     

Are firms accessing venture funding more financially constrained? New evidence from capital structure adjustments

We analyze whether firms that receive venture capital (VC) at a later date face more financial constraints than a one-by-one matched sample of firms that did not receive VC funding (control group). The aim is to check whether their financial flexibility explains why they decide to seek external equity funding. In contrast with other papers, which focus on the sensitivity of investments to cash flow, we study this issue by applying a dynamic model to analyze the speed of adjustment to their target debt levels prior to receiving the first VC investment. We analyze a representative sample of 237 Spanish unlisted firms that received VC between 1995 and 2007 and its corresponding control group. We find that firms that receive VC funding show a significantly lower speed of adjustment than their matched peers before the initial VC round. It seems that the former are more concerned about funding the required investments than about adjusting the firm's debt ratio to a target level. Our results confirm the role of VC in filling the equity gap in constrained unlisted firms. From a capital structure perspective, VC may become a tool for these companies to balance their capital structure in a growth process.     

Asset liquidity and venture capital investment

We examine the relationship between asset market liquidity and venture capital (VC) investment and find that it is inverted U-shaped. Asset liquidity and VC investment are positively related for low levels of asset liquidity but negatively related for higher levels of asset liquidity. We also document evidence that VC firms with more industry experience invest more in a liquid asset market than those without industry experience or with significant experience in other industries. Portfolio companies obtained their first investment in a liquid asset market are less likely to exit successfully; however, given a successful exit, they prefer to exit through mergers and acquisitions rather than going public.     

When U.S. venture capital ventures abroad

Older, more experienced and smaller U.S. venture capital firms are most probable to sacrifice proximate distance for new opportunities in foreign, and mostly mature, portfolio companies. These companies are treated differently than the domestic ones, as U.S. venture capital firms collaborate with and delegate monitoring to foreign partners, rather than stage or syndicate. Successful outcomes mostly occur in more mature, non‐hi‐tech, portfolio companies that receive more financing per round. Our results are robust to the investee country's openness and industry classification, stage of the investment and possible sample selection problems.     

Debt financing,venture capital,and the performance of initial public offerings

We examine the roles of two financial intermediaries, lenders and venture capitalists, in a sample of more than 6000 IPO firms during 1980–2012. Venture capitalists and lenders generally fund different types of firms and, on average, are substitutes; however, in some instances we observe interactions and complementary roles between the two funding sources. Firms with high debt have lower valuation uncertainty, and lower initial day returns than those backed by venture capital. However, firms with high debt levels underperform in the long-run, especially those without venture capital. We provide some evidence that firms backed by reputable venture capitalists perform better.     

风险投资对创业板IPO折价影响的实证研究

本文以截至2011年6月30日在我国创业板上市的236家公司作为研究对象,研究风险投资对创业板IPO折价的影响。研究发现：（1）有风险投资参与的企业IPO折价显著高于无风险投资参与的企业,支持声誉效应假说,即风险投资机构以IPO折价来提早退出投资项目,以此来建立自己的声誉,从而吸引更多的资金流入;（2）在对有风投参股的投资公司做进一步分析后发现一一随着风投参与度的增大,IPO调整折价率并未出现明显的提升,创业板企业IPO时风险投资机构的数量、风险投资机构持股比例与调整折价率关系不显著。     

On the role of inexperienced venture capitalists in taking companies public

We use venture-backed initial public offerings (IPOs) to identify and examine the comparative advantage of inexperienced venture capitalists. We argue that, vis-a-vis more established counterparts, younger venture capital firms have a comparative advantage at producing soft information about relatively opaque start-up companies due to their organizational structure. We then quantify an outcome—IPO initial return—from the matching of venture capitalists and start-up companies that demonstrates how this comparative advantage arises. Our findings thus reveal an important aspect of how inexperienced venture capitalists support start-up companies.     

Performance of Private to Public MBOs: The Role of Venture Capital

Abstract:   Using a unique dataset, we examine financial performance, and venture capital involvement in 167 MBOs exiting through IPOs (MBO‐IPOs) on the London Stock Exchange, during the period 1964 –1997. VC backed MBOs seem to be more underpriced than MBOs without venture capital backing, based on average value‐weighted returns. MBOs backed by highly reputable VCs tend to be older companies, and exit earlier than MBOs backed by less reputable VCs. The results contradict 'certification' and 'grandstanding' hypotheses supported by US data ( Megginson and Weiss, 1991 ; and Gompers, 1996 , respectively). We found no evidence of either significant underperformance, or that VC backed MBOs perform better than their non‐VC backed counterparts in the long run. However, MBOs backed by highly reputable venture capital firms seem to be better long‐term investments as compared to those backed by less prestigious venture capitalist firms. The results remain robust after using different methods to measure performance, and after controlling for sample selectivity bias.     

Syndication in Venture Capital Financing

We examine syndication in venture capital (VC) investments between 1980 and 2005. We argue that VC firms syndicate investments to mitigate human capital and financial constraints within individual VC firms and to reduce uncertainty about firm value. Our results are consistent with those arguments. We find that syndication is more likely for firms in the earliest stage of development and firms in the last stage of development as private firms (when human capital investments are greatest), for firms requiring the largest amounts of financial capital, and for firms with greater growth opportunities (those that are most difficult to value).     

The determinants of venture capital funding: evidence across countries

This paper analyses the determinants of venture capital for a sample of 21 countries. In particular, we consider the importance of initial public offerings (IPOs), gross domestic product (GDP) and market capitalization growth, labor market rigidities, accounting standards, private pension funds, and government programs. We find that IPOs are the strongest driver of venture capital investing. Private pension fund levels are a significant determinant over time but not across countries. Surprisingly, GDP and market capitalization growth are not significant. Government policies can have a strong impact, both by setting the regulatory stage, and by galvanizing investment during downturns. Finally, we also show that different types of venture capital financing are affected differently by these factors. In particular, early stage venture capital investing is negatively impacted by labor market rigidities, while later stage is not. IPOs have no effect on early stage venture capital investing across countries, but are a significant determinant of later stage venture capital investing across countries. Finally, government funded venture capital has different sensitivities to the determinants of venture capital than non-government funded venture capital. Our insights emphasize the need for a more differentiated approach to venture capital, both from a research as well as from a policy perspective. We feel that while later stage venture capital investing is well understood, early stage and government funded investments still require more extensive research.     

Biomarker of Quality? Venture‐backed Biotech IPOs and Insider Participation

Corporate financial managers of biotech firms need long‐term financing to reach key milestones, and that requires a long‐ term capital structure. They must balance a mix of investors with different objectives and different investment horizons that includes traditional venture capitalists and also hedge funds and mutual funds. This study helps practitioners understand the complex role of exit decisions, as venture capitalists seek better exit strategies and performance. IPOs are financing but not “exit” moves. In addition to certifying firm value, insider purchasing of shares in the IPO offering has two major consequences. First, venture capitalists reallocate large sums of capital from early‐stage to late‐stage deals that are expected to have lower risk (but also lower expected return) and shorter time to exit. Second, the speed at which VCs exit after the IPO depends on the firm ownership structure after the IPO and the stock liquidity. Going public with a significant participation by venture capitalists will probably increase the post‐IPO ownership and decrease the free float of the stock, implying a delay of the exit and the realization of the capital gains from the investments. Although this study has focused exclusively on the biotechnology industry, insider participation is not unique to it. Biotech's venture brethren in the software and technology industries also have insider participation in IPOs. During 2003–2015, approximately 41 venture‐backed firms outside of the biotechnology sector had insider participation.     

Do stressed PE firms misbehave?

For private equity (PE) firms, follow-on funds provide additional streams of management fees for a considerable time. When prospective investors evaluate the performance of PE firms' latest funds, they have to rely on valuations reported by PE firms. The link between PE firms' fundraising and performance evaluation is thus an area susceptible to manipulation resulting in potentially high stakes. We examine the relationship between PE firms' fundraising pressure and earnings management in portfolio companies, along with heterogeneity in behaviour by reputation and dry powder. To proxy for the degree of fundraising pressure, we develop an index based on PE firms' affiliations, stage in the fundraising cycle, and fundraising frequency. Results suggest that the fundraising pressure leads to more earnings management in portfolio companies, regardless of PE firm reputation. While the reputational effect remains unchanged under a change in funding pressure, dry powder exhibits a strong moderating effect under extreme funding pressure. The results are robust to alternative proxies for earnings management, alternative fundraising indexes, and various controls for endogeneity concerns.     

The Role of Private Equity in Life Sciences

In a roundtable published in this journal a year ago, there was a clear consensus that the R&D function in big pharma was inefficient and in need of major restructuring, possibly through increased investments by venture capital and private equity firms. In this discussion, an accomplished group of industry practitioners begins by looking at the prospects for both venture capital and private equity to play meaningful roles in financing early- and mid-stage drug development. In so doing, they explore questions like the following:

• • Are there ways for big pharma and biotech to reduce “science risk” and make R&D funding more profitable and attractive to venture capital and private equity—and perhaps even hedge funds?
• • What roles do you see for specialty PE firms like Symphony Capital and Paul Capital, which are now bundling mid-stage development assets and securitizing royalties?

Then the panelists turn to the broader life sciences industry and consider the outlook for leveraged private equity transactions involving marketed products, late-stage development, and services. Here they consider issues like the following:

• • Will PE be attracted to less-R&D-intensive activities like medtech and generics?
• • Have the recent consolidation through mergers and reorganization of big pharma into decentralized business units created opportunities for carve-outs of certain businesses?

For big pharma and life sciences companies in general, the answers to such questions point to greater specialization and focus achieved partly through strategic alliances with venture capital, private equity, and even hedge funds, and involving marketed products and services as well as early-stage drug development.     

Venture Capital Networks in Southeast Asia: Network characteristics and cohesive subgroups

Venture capital firms (VC) have encountered with uncertainty and risk of asymmetric information due to an investment in early-to-growth stage start-ups with technological base and high growth potential. Venture capital syndication network helps reduce a broad gap of information asymmetry in a venture capital investment. Moreover, network connections are found to be the success factor for venture capitalists under a lack of fully developed institutional environment in emerging market. Venture capital industry in Southeast Asia is nascent yet in demanding and fast growing. Despite a decline in the number of venture deals in the US, the deals keep surging in Southeast Asia (SEA), one of the most significant and dynamic propellers of the world economy. To develop the entrepreneurial ecosystem in SEA, it is interesting to examine how VC firms are connected to one another. Even though several literatures found some distinctive network characteristics amidst the US, European and Chinese venture capital market, the Southeast Asian has left unattended. In this paper, we initiate the network of venture capital firms among Southeast Asian nations and explore their relationships through social network analysis. The purposes of this study are to investigate the topological and statistical properties of VC network consisting of small-world behavior, power law distribution, and centrality measure such as degree, closeness, and betweenness. In addition, we classify various levels of connections into subnetworks and examine influential groups of VCs in Southeast Asia.We initiate an empirical study on the characteristics of VC network across different countries in Southeast Asia by using a unique hand-collected dataset of syndicated deals. Social network analysis has initially and preliminarily been applied to the VC network in this region. This paper contributes to VC network literature in providing a unique network structure and network metrics of venture capital in SEA. In managerial contribution, this study provides more structural VC cooperation towards VC syndication networks. This benefits to venture capital firms who are looking for potential partners in Southeast Asian region and start-up companies who are looking for funding with high-networked or influencial VCs. The results also confirm previous evidence of significance on VC networks in emerging market, even if the institution and regulation are claimed to fall behind that in the developed market. This research introduces the fact that the venture capital network in Southeast Asia has small-world pattern and Singapore acts as a hub of venture capital market in the region. Top-ranking VC firms have been listed by network centrality across nations, while multi-company syndications are prevailing in Southeast Asia.     

On the determinants of SME capital structure in Central and Eastern Europe: A dynamic panel analysis

The purpose of this paper is to test how firm characteristics affect SMEs’ capital structure using a unique dataset of micro, small, and medium-sized firms (SMEs) in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). We carry out a panel data analysis of 3175 SMEs from seven CEE countries during the period 2001–2005, modeling the leverage ratio as a function of firm specific characteristics hypothesized by capital structure theory. By using the cash flow as an explanatory variable, we test some of the predictions of the pecking order theory. According to this theory, firms with more available internal funds should use less external funding. We do find strong evidence in favor of the pecking order theory, given that there is a negative and significant correlation between profitability and leverage. When we control for other firm specific characteristics such as future growth opportunities, liquidity, sales growth, size and assets structure, the cash flow is found to be a strong determinant of firm leverage. We also argue that the determinants of firm leverage may be considerably different depending on firms’ size and age. The empirical results show that cash flow coefficient remains negative and statistically significant only for medium-sized firms, thus suggesting that larger firms with sufficient internal funds use less external funding than comparable smaller firms. We obtain similar results when we estimate the model by firm age; older firms demonstrate similar behavior as larger firms.