Market Discounts and Shareholder Gains for Placing Equity Privately

Despite selling at substantial discounts, private placements of equity are associated with positive abnormal returns. We find evidence that discounts reflect information costs borne by private investors and abnormal returns reflect favorable information about firm value. Results are consistent with the role of private placements as a solution to the Myers and Majluf underinvestment problem and with the use of private placements to signal undervaluation. We also find some evidence of anticipated monitoring benefits from private sales of equity. For the smaller firms that comprise our sample, information effects appear to be relatively more important than ownership effects.     

The information content of insider trading around seasoned equity offerings

This paper examines insider trading around seasoned equity offering (SEO) announcements in Hong Kong. The announcements of private placings (rights offerings) are associated with positive (negative) abnormal stock returns. However, longer-term stock returns are negative for both private placings and rights offerings. In general, insiders are net purchasers in placing firms in the 6 months prior to and 6 months subsequent to the SEO, whereas insiders are net sellers in rights issue firms in the 6 months prior to and 6 months subsequent to the issue. The net purchases made by the insiders of firms making placements help them maintain their control rights, which are otherwise diluted by the placements. Insider trading does not explain longer-term investment returns.     

Private placements of convertible securities: stock returns,operating performance and abnormal accruals

This study examines long‐run stock returns, operating performance and abnormal accruals of private placements of convertible securities. We investigate the effects surrounding private placements to test and differentiate the implications of several competing hypotheses. While the monitoring and certification hypotheses suggest positive effects, the managerial entrenchment, overvaluation and windows‐of‐opportunity hypotheses suggest the opposite. We find that placing firms generally experience positive effects in the pre‐periods and negative effects in the post‐periods. Our overall findings are more consistent with the predictions of the overvaluation and windows‐of‐opportunity hypotheses while our post‐placement evidence is also consistent with the predictions of the managerial entrenchment hypothesis.     

The Wealth Effects of Reducing Private Placement Resale Restrictions

Recently, the US Securities and Exchange Commission reduced resale restrictions on Rule 144 private placements from 12 months to 6 months with the intention of lowering the cost of equity capital for issuing firms. In Canada, similar regulatory changes were adopted several years ago, providing a unique opportunity to test the wealth effects of reducing private placement resale restrictions. We find that shortening resale restrictions reduces the liquidity portion of offer price discounts, and thus lowers the cost of equity capital for issuing firms, but has no significant effect on announcement‐period abnormal returns after controlling for issuer type. However, there is a fundamental shift in the types of firms making private placements of common stock after the legislation‐induced easing of resale restrictions. Specifically, we find that smaller firms and firms with greater information asymmetry are less likely to issue privately placed common stock after the legislative change, suggesting that the easing of resale restrictions reduces the costly signal that helps to overcome the Myers and Majluf (1984) underinvestment problem.     

Earnings management and long-run stock performance following private equity placements

We investigate whether the documented earnings management preceding public equity offerings applies to private placements of equity. We also investigate whether earnings management can help explain long-run stock performance following private placements. Our main findings are: (1) little evidence of upward earnings management around private equity placements, and (2) little predictive power of abnormal accruals for long-run stock performance following private equity placements. These results suggest that earnings management is not responsible for post-offering underperformance, if any, for firms issuing equity privately. Our results are robust to two alternative measures of earnings management and three measures of abnormal returns estimated over two sample periods.     

Divestments and financial distress in leveraged buyouts

This paper investigates the wealth effects of 134 divestments by 41 firms that underwent leveraged buyouts in the 1980s. Stock in these companies is privately owned. Bond returns for publicly traded debt are used to measure the wealth effects of the divestment announcement. These divestments are, on average, not associated with significant wealth effects for the full sample. However, firms that experience financial distress have negative and significant abnormal returns associated with their divestments, while returns in non-event months are insignificant. In contrast, non-distressed firms gain when asset sales are announced. The losses suffered by bondholders in distressed sellers are large and significant when core assets are divested. Bondholders in these firms do not suffer significant losses when non-core assets are divested. Finally, abnormal bond returns are related to the structure of the firms' post-buyout debt. Returns are negatively related to the use of private debt in the capital structure and positively related to the use of subordinated debt.     

Wealth Effects of Private Equity Placements: Evidence from Singapore

We examine institutional characteristics and the wealth effects of private equity placements in Singapore. Our findings show that private placements in Singapore generally result in a negative wealth effect and a reduction in ownership concentration. We find that at high levels of ownership concentration, the relation between abnormal returns and changes in ownership concentration is significantly negative. We also show that the market reacts less favorably to placements in which management ownership falls below 50%, but more favorably to issues to single investors. We do not find evidence suggesting that our results are due to an information effect.     

Invisible hand and helping hand: Private placement of public equity in China

In this study of private placement of public equity (PEP) in China, we examine post-placement stock performance and the possible bases for regulatory approval for PEP applications. We find that firms receiving approvals for PEP issues are financially stronger than those rejected by regulatory authorities and experience significant positive long-term abnormal returns following the placements. These long-term abnormal returns are higher when controlling shareholders participate in the placements and when the capital raised is allocated to asset restructuring or M&As. The evidence supports the view that the government offers a “helping hand” by screening PEP applications and approving those with promising investments and capable investors. Investor overoptimism about investment opportunities at firms that issue equity privately is constrained because PEP participants can effectively monitor and discipline management and help improve investment efficiency over time.     

How Do Institutional Investors Affect Corporate Performance? Evidence from Private Placements in China

Using data on private placements in China from 2007 to 2014, we show that abnormal returns of issuing companies’ stocks are significantly positive on the announcement day, but they become significantly negative during the event window [?20, +20]. Participation by institutional investors has a significant and negative impact on the short-term stock returns. This negative effect is also present in issuing companies’ long-term stock returns and profitability. Furthermore, we find that participation by institutional investors reduces dividend payments after private placements. Overall, our findings do not support the monitoring hypothesis of institutional investors’ role in corporate finance but are consistent with the management entrenchment hypothesis and shareholder pessimism hypothesis.     

Do Private Placements Turn Around Firms? Evidence from Taiwan

We analyze the stock and operating performance of firms issuing private placements in Taiwan. Issuing firms have poor pre‐issue performance and earn significantly positive returns at announcement. Placements with an owner‐manager or with nonexecutive directors are associated with better post‐issue stock and operating performance, suggesting that an increase in insiders’ stakes leads to better alignment of managerial incentives and an increase in monitoring by insiders. In contrast, placements made to outside investors are unlikely to turn around the issuing firms.     

Ratings,Commercial Paper,and Equity Returns

We present the first evidence that initial ratings of commercial paper influence common stock returns. Highly-rated industrial issues of commercial paper, unaccompanied by bank letters of credit, are associated with significantly positive abnormal returns; lower-rated issues are not. The stock price effects of changes in commercial paper ratings also demonstrate the relevance of ratings to the financing of firms. Rating downgrades, especially those that imply an exit from the commercial paper market, produce significantly negative abnormal returns; upgrades have no effects. Initial commercial paper ratings and subsequent reratings appear to help investors sort firms by their future prospects.     

The Impact of Mispricing and Asymmetric Information on the Price Discount of Private Placements of Common Stock

The price discount on privately placed stock is large and can vary substantially among firms. While earlier studies attribute price discounts on privately placed stock to illiquidity and costs of gathering information, we offer a more complete explanation. We find that firms exhibiting higher overvaluation have significantly larger price discounts in private stock sales. We also find that higher levels of asymmetric information about the issuing firm and about the stock market environment at the time of the private placement cause more pronounced discounts in the offer price. Our analysis also shows that post-issue abnormal returns following private placements are higher when discounts are less pronounced.     

The curious case of converts

We document negative abnormal returns and abnormally high short selling in the trading days immediately before the private placements of U.S. convertible bonds. Issues experiencing greater post-placement short selling have more intense pre-placement short selling. In contrast, there are no pre-placement negative abnormal returns and less pre-placement abnormal short selling for issuers who also engage in share repurchases. Pre-placement findings are related to specific terms of the converts and related buybacks. While other potential explanations exist, the overall weight of the evidence suggests that the most plausible explanation is front-running.     

Uncertainty triggers overreaction: evidence from corporate takeovers

Behavioural finance models suggest that under uncertainty, investors overweight their private information and overreact to it. We test this theoretical prediction in an M&A framework. We find that under high information uncertainty, when investors are more likely to possess firm-specific information, acquiring firms generate highly positive and significant gains following the announcement of private stock and private cash acquisitions (positive news) while the market heavily punishes public stock (negative news) deals. On the other hand, under conditions of low information uncertainty, when investors do not possess private information, the market reaction is complete (i.e. zero abnormal returns) irrespective of the type of acquisition. Overall, we provide empirical evidence that shows that information uncertainty plays a significant role in explaining short-run acquirer abnormal returns.     

RAISING CAPITAL WITH PRIVATE PLACEMENTS OF DEBT

In this study the role of private placements of debt in the capital acquisition decision of public utilities is investigated. Whereas public offerings are sales of securities through financial intermediaries to the public-at-large, private placements are direct sales of securities by an issuing corporation to a limited number of institutional investors. In contrast to the negative stock price reactions typically found for public security sales, private placements are associated with significant positive abnormal returns in the shares of the issuing public utilities. Also, larger private placements appear to elicit a more favorable market response. Results are consistent with reduced information asymmetries and increased monitoring of the issuing firm resulting from the private placement.     

Managerial Placement and Entrenchment

Using data on companies that have implemented private placements in China from 2011 to 2016, we examine the discount on private placements, short-term stock returns, and long-term performance after the placements. Our goal is to determine whether the prevailing certification and entrenchment hypotheses can explain managerial placements. We find that the participation of managerial investors has a significant and negative impact on short-term stock returns. Such a negative effect can also be found on issuing companies’ long-term profitability. Moreover, managerial placements have a higher discount than nonmanagerial placements. Our findings suggest that managerial placement is consistent with the entrenchment hypothesis but not the certification hypothesis.     

Differential shareholder wealth and volume effects surrounding private equity placements in New Zealand

Private equity placements in New Zealand exhibit a strong positive relationship between abnormal announcement returns and the price at which shares are placed. The relationship suggests that placement price conveys important information regarding firm quality and value. This is significant as the New Zealand market has different regulations governing private equity placements compared to other countries. For example, private placement purchasers in New Zealand can buy shares at substantial discounts and immediately sell on-market without disclosing these trades to the market for a period of at least 5 days. Private placements issued at a premium exhibit a permanent positive impact on firm value. In contrast, those placed at a discount experience negative announcement returns and show a significant run-down in returns following the announcement. Private placements spark a large increase in trading activity in the 5 days following an announcement and the increase is particularly strong for those placed at a discount. We also find that companies that privately place equity in New Zealand are typically low book to market, thinly traded stocks. Therefore, the immediate returns available to purchasers of discounted shares may reflect fair compensation for these risks.     

The Valuation Effects of Private Placements of Convertible Debt

Share price reactions to announcements of 61 private placements of convertible debt securities are investigated and a significant positive average abnormal return of 1.80% is documented. This unique result contrasts with the negative average abnormal return associated with public sales of convertible debt securities. The positive effect on common shareholders' wealth appears to be related to the relative size of the private issue and unrelated to the degree to which the convertible bond is “out-of-the-money” at issuance.     

New evidence on the announcement effect of convertible and exchangeable bonds

This study investigates the announcement and issuance effects of offering convertible bonds and exchangeable bonds using data for the Swiss and German markets during January 1996 and May 2003. The analysis suggests that announcement effects of convertible bonds and exchangeable bonds are associated with significantly negative abnormal returns. German firms exhibit a stronger reaction than Swiss firms, possibly for institutional reasons. We also investigate the effect of the market return of the announcement effect and find that the negative abnormal returns are significantly more pronounced when previous market returns have been negative. Furthermore, we analyze the relation between the announcement effects and equity components by controlling for the equity signal sent to the market. We find the size of the equity component of an issue to have a strong influence on the announcement effect for convertible but not for exchangeable securities and offer an explanation for this difference.     

Do private equity consortiums facilitate collusion in takeover bidding?

We address whether the joint bidding by private equity consortiums facilitates collusion in the takeover market. We employ a sample of 870 takeovers of publicly traded targets in the 2003 to 2007 period, the time period which is the focus of investigation by the Justice Department and the source of cases for class action lawsuits. A unique aspect of our analysis is that we determine the identification of private equity bidders from actual merger documents rather than rely on sources such as Securities Data Corp and that we analyze both prominent private equity bidders as well as smaller private equity firms. Our analysis finds competitive reasons for consortium formation based on scale, risk and bidder expertise. We also find that both single private equity bidders and private equity consortiums are associated with significantly greater levels of takeover competition than other types of bidders. While we find some evidence that target abnormal returns are lower in private equity consortium deals for narrow windows around the initial takeover-related announcement date, we find that these results do not hold for longer event windows that better account for the differences in the takeover process across types of bidders. Analysis that controls for the endogenous selection of consortium formation also fails to find any negative effect of consortiums on either takeover competition or target returns. We also do not find any negative effects of consortiums formed by prominent private equity firms. We interpret the evidence to be inconsistent with a collusive explanation for consortium formation in the 2003 to 2007 period and to be consistent with competitive reasons for consortium formation.