Evidence on What CFOs Think About the IPO Process: Practice,Theory, and Managerial Implications

Many privately held companies aspire to go public through an initial public offering. But the IPO process is time‐consuming, expensive, and fraught with uncertainty. With the aim of shedding light on the process and reducing at least some of the uncertainty, the authors asked several hundred CFOs to share their experiences and perceptions with regard to six specific aspects of the IPO process: (1) motives for going public; (2) the timing of IPOs; (3) criteria for choosing an underwriter; (4) cause of IPO underpricing; (5) IPO signaling; and (6) reasons to stay private. The main findings from the survey are summarized below:

• ? The primary motive for going public is to create a currency‐publicly traded shares‐that can be used to fund acquisitions.
• ? CFOs strongly base the timing of their IPOs on overall stock market conditions, while paying relatively little attention to IPO market conditions.
• ? CFOs choose underwriters based on their overall reputation and industry expertise. Somewhat surprisingly, issuers did not express much concern about the underwriter fee structure.
• ? CFOs view underpricing mainly as a means of compensating investors for taking on the risk of IPOs in the after‐market.
• ? The two strongest perceived positive signals for issuer quality are a history of strong earnings and the use of a reputable investment bank. The strongest negative signal is the sale of insider shares in the IPO.
• ? The primary reason for staying private cited by the CFOs of private companies is the desire to maintain decision‐making control.

     

Do Initial Public Offering Firms Purchase Analyst Coverage with Underpricing?

We report that initial public offering (IPO) underpricing is positively related to analyst coverage by the lead underwriter and to the presence of an all‐star analyst on the research staff of the lead underwriter. These findings are robust to controls for other determinants of underpricing and to controls for the endogeneity of underpricing and analyst coverage. In addition, we find that the probability of switching underwriters between IPO and seasoned equity offering is negatively related to the unexpected amount of post‐IPO analyst coverage. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that underpricing is, in part, compensation for expected post‐IPO analyst coverage from highly ranked analysts.     

Underwriter reputation and IPO underpricing: The role of institutional investors in the Chinese growth enterprise market

This paper investigates the effects of underwriter reputation on initial public offering (IPO) underpricing in the Chinese Growth Enterprise Market, in light of the conflicting evidence in the literature on IPO underpricing. Using data during the post global financial crisis period, we find that IPO firms with prestigious underwriters have lower market-adjusted initial returns on average. We further find that prestigious underwriters reduce IPO underpricing by minimizing the time gap between the offering and listing, choosing high-quality firms to underwrite, and reducing information asymmetry between issuers and investors. In the presence of institutional investors, however, we find that more underpricing occurs, as these investors tend to obtain access to IPO shares at a higher price discount via private placements. This new finding suggests that the institutional investors have a role to play in the case of high under-pricing, which partly gets corrected via underwriter reputation.     

Is Underwriter Retention of IPO Shares a Good Substitute for Underwriting Spreads?

In Taiwan, underwriters are required to retain at least 10 percent but no more than 25 percent of underwritten initial public offering (IPO) shares and sell the remainder to the public. We find that IPO underpricing causes underwriters to retain more shares to earn capital gains on retained shares and that underwriter retention is a signal of IPO underpricing. If underwriter retention is cancelled, underwriters need to be compensated through lottery draw processing fees or underwriting spreads. We show that issuers should compensate underwriters through underwriting spreads directly, rather than indirectly through underwriter retention or lottery draw processing fees.     

Underwriter Spread, Underwriter Reputation, and IPO Underpricing: A Simultaneous Equation Analysis

This paper studies the relationships between underwriter reputation, underwriter spread, and IPO underpricing. We consider the information content of underwriter spread and find that it conveys information pertinent to IPO quality. Because underwriter spread is endogenous, underpricing and underwriter spread are jointly determined in a simultaneous equation system. Also, we examine the IPO market for evidence of segmentation, and our results suggest some market segmentation. Underwriter spread impacts initial underpricing for a group of medium-reputation underwriters, while underpricing affects underwriter spread for groups of low- and high-reputation underwriters. Consequently, high-risk IPOs may not be priced the same way as low-risk IPOs. We attribute this finding to regulation, competition, and/or market segmentation.     

Underwriter Compensation Structure: Can It Really Bond Underwriters?

Underwriter compensation can be structured as all cash or a combination of cash and warrants. Using a sample of small initial public offerings (IPOs), we find that underwriter compensation contracts that include warrants in exchange for cash can serve as certification for IPO firms by substituting for reputation capital. When underwriters accept warrants when they could have received more cash compensation, the IPOs avoid the well documented long‐run underperformance. However, when underwriters receive warrants after maximizing cash compensation, the IPO experiences higher underpricing and poorer long‐run performance. The findings are consistent with a motivation by the underwriters to circumvent regulatory constraints.     

UNDERPRICING OF IPOS THAT FOLLOW PRIVATE PLACEMENT

In this study we examine the underpricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) by firms that have private placements of equity before their IPOs (PP IPO firms). We find that PP IPOs are associated with significantly less underpricing than their peers. Furthermore, PP IPOs are associated with lower underwriting spreads, more reputable underwriting syndicates, and greater postissue analyst coverage as compared to IPOs that are issued by their industry peers under similar market conditions. Consistent with the implications of the information asymmetry explanation for IPO underpricing, our findings suggest that companies could benefit by conveying their quality via successful pre‐IPO private placements that help reduce the cost of going public.     

The Credibility of Earnings Forecasts in IPO Prospectuses and Underpricing

This paper provides empirical evidence of the impact of the voluntary disclosure of management earnings forecasts in IPO prospectuses and of the credibility of these forecasts, as perceived by investors at the time of the IPO. We measure forecast credibility ex ante with two approaches: (i) a vector of determinants of credibility that are observable by market participants at the time of the issue and (ii) the predicted value of the forecast error based on some of these determinants. Controlling for the firm's decision on whether or not to issue a forecast, we find that the issue of a forecast reduces underpricing. We find that the quality of the firm's governance and of the auditor and underwriter associated with the issue seems to act as a substitute to the disclosure of an earnings forecast in the prospectus, so that they significantly decrease the level of underpricing only for non‐forecasters. However, despite our various approaches to measure ex ante credibility, we find no association between the pricing of the issue and perceived forecast credibility at the time of the IPO.     

Litigation risk,underpricing, and money-losing IPOs

We examine the impact of firms' pre-IPO earnings on the relationship between litigation risk and IPO underpricing. We confirm the insurance effect of the lawsuit avoidance hypothesis; however, we find that the use of underpricing to reduce litigation risk is mainly associated with firms with negative earnings at the time of going public. Our results are robust to the timelines over which sample firms were sued, alternative underpricing measures, the addition of various control variables to our baseline regression models, and different proxies to categorize IPO firms. We also investigate the relationship between litigation risk, pre-IPO earnings, and underwriter gross spreads. The results indicate that, when dealing with firms facing a high risk of litigation, underwriters charge significantly higher spreads to negative-earnings issuers than profitable IPO firms.     

Underwriter Reputation,Issuer Ownership,and Pre‐IPO Earnings Management: Evidence from China

This paper investigates the correlation between pre‐initial public offering (pre‐IPO) earnings management and underwriter reputation for issuers with different ownership structures in China. We document a significantly inverse relationship between underwriter reputation and pre‐IPO earnings management for non‐state‐owned enterprises (NSOE) issuers only, while no significant association is found for state‐owned enterprises (SOE) issuers. We also find that for the NSOE new issue market, underwriter reputation is positively correlated with issuer post‐IPO performance indicating that prestigious underwriters can incrementally improve issuer post‐IPO performance.     

Venture Capital Valuation,Partial Adjustment,and Underpricing: Behavioral Bias or Information Production?

Using a sample of venture capital (VC)‐backed initial public offerings (IPOs), we analyze the role played by perceived valuation changes on IPO underpricing. We find that perceived valuation change from the last pre‐IPO VC round to the IPO affects IPO underpricing in a nonlinear way. Further analysis indicates that information‐based theories, not behavioral biases, explain this nonlinearity. We also find that the previously documented partial adjustment effect and its nonlinear impact on IPO underpricing are related to the trajectory of the perceived valuation changes, which stands in stark contrast to prior evidence of the importance of behavioral biases.     

Underpricing and long-run performance of Chinese IPOs: the role of underwriter reputation

This study examines the impact of underwriter reputation on IPO underpricing and long-run performance in the China stock market over the period 2001 to 2006. This sample period is notable for the implementation of a verification and approval system that occurred during it, which provided underwriters more freedom to price IPOs. We develop two alternative proxies to measure underwriter reputation based on either the ratio of the total gross proceeds raised or the number of IPOs managed by each underwriter. We find that underwriter reputation does not affect the level of underpricing, but that the level of long-run underperformance is significantly mitigated when IPOs are managed by more prestigious underwriters.     

The Underwriter Persistence Phenomenon

This study presents new evidence that initial IPO returns have persistent underwriter‐specific components. These components cannot be explained by existing measures of underwriter quality, underwriter service, or controls for several known predictors of initial IPO returns. Tests that trace the roots of persistence most broadly support theories of asymmetric information among underwriters. I present such a model, and consistent with its predictions, I find that high underpricing underwriters (1) are responsible for a majority of the partial adjustment phenomenon, (2) make more informed analyst revisions, (3) experience superior market share growth, and (4) are more likely to serve an institutional clientele.     

Are share price levels informative? Evidence from the ownership, pricing, turnover and performance of IPO firms

We ask whether a firm's choice of IPO price is informative in the sense that it relates systematically to the firm's other choices and characteristics. We find that both institutional ownership and underwriter reputation increases monotonically with the chosen IPO price level. We also find that the relationship between IPO price and underpricing is U-shaped. In contrast, post-IPO turnover displays an inverted U-shaped relation to IPO price. Moreover, firms choosing a higher (lower) stock price level experience lower (higher) mortality rates. Our results are robust to controls for market liquidity and firm size, and for partial adjustment of IPO prices based on pre-market information.     

Value Gains on Flotation and IPO Underpricing

Abstract:  Utilising a unique dataset of 502 UK IPOs we undertake an empirical analysis of the relationship between underpricing and value gains on flotation. We find support for our hypothesis that IPO underpricing is related to the extent of anticipated value gains on the private to public transition. We analyse alternative driving mechanisms behind this relationship, and our results suggest that the underpricing of IPOs is driven by both underwriters and issuing company directors, each of whom derive net benefits over the longer term from underpricing at the IPO.     

The influence of group affiliation and the underwriting process on emerging market IPOs: The case of the Philippines

In this paper we document underpricing and aftermarket returns of Philippine IPOs, discuss specific features of the Philippine IPO market, and investigate whether differential underpricing occurs due to certification considerations or potential conflicts of interest. We find that IPO underpricing is greater in cases where the offering firm is affiliated to a family business group, specifically when these affiliated firms use a foreign lead underwriter. Our results lead us to conclude that conflict of interest problems are recognized by market participants and that these conflicts of interest lead to differential underpricing.     

Why are IPOs underpriced? Evidence from Japan's hybrid auction-method offerings

We document discretionary underpricing and partial adjustment of IPO prices in the public offer tranche of Japan's hybrid auction regime, in which investor information differences are not important, there are no roadshows, preferential allocations are negligible, institutional investing is low, and the public offer tranche cannot fail. The magnitude and variation of underpricing in our sample, which spans relatively hot and cold markets, are similar to those reported for US IPOs. The evidence is most consistent with underpricing arising from an implicit contract to allocate risk related to initial mispricing where, in exchange for guaranteeing a minimum price, the underwriter participates indirectly in upside performance. The results raise important questions about interpretations of IPO underpricing in the US.     

Why Do European Firms Go Public?

We survey chief financial officers (CFOs) from 12 European countries regarding the determinants of going public and exchange listing decisions. Most CFOs identify enhanced visibility and financing for growth as the most important benefits of an IPO, but other motivations for IPOs differ significantly across firms, countries, and legal systems. We find strong support for the IPO theories that emphasise financial and strategic considerations, such as enhanced reputation and credibility, and financial flexibility as a major advantage of an IPO. At the same time, we find moderate support for theories that focus on exit strategy, balance of power with creditors, external monitoring, and merger and acquisition motivations. European CFOs' views on the major benefits of an IPO are generally similar to those of US managers as reported in Brau and Fawcett (2006) , but differ significantly on outside monitoring; outside monitoring is considered a major benefit by European CFOs but a major cost by US CFOs. Our evidence suggests that the decision to go public is a complex one, and cannot be explained by one single theory because firms seek multiple benefits in going public. These motivations are influenced by the firm's ownership structure, size and age as well as by the home country's institutional and regulatory environment.     

Conflict of Interest in Commercial Bank Equity Underwriting

This paper examines the pricing characteristics of initial public offerings underwritten by commercial banks. Assuming IPO underpricing is directly related to ex ante uncertainty, if the market rationally perceives these commercial banks to have a conflict of interest, these securities should have more underpricing than non-commercial bank underwritten initial public offerings (all else being equal). On the other hand, if the market believes that commercial bank involvement signals firm quality, less underpricing should be observed. This topic has recently gained in importance with the passage of the Financial Services Reform Act in November 1999. We find that the underpricing of commercial bank underwritten initial public offerings in which the firm had a previous banking relationship with the underwriter is significantly less than those underwritten by investment banks.     

The Effect of Banking Relationships on the Firm's IPO Underpricing

This paper investigates the effects of pre‐IPO banking relationships on a firm's IPO. Using a new and unique data set, which compares the firm's pre‐IPO banking relationships to the underwriters managing the firm's new issue, I test whether banking relationships established before the firm's IPO ameliorate asymmetric informa tion problems behind high IPO underpricing. The results show that firms with a pre‐IPO banking relationship with a prospective underwriter face about 17% lower underpricing than firms without such banking relationships. These results are robust to controlling for the firm's endogenous selection of the pre‐IPO banking institution.