监管视角下创业板曲线借壳路径研究

创业板禁止借壳上市行为,却出现企业通过"曲线借壳"规避制度监管的情况。在研究创业板上市公司公告、询问函等信息后,总结出我国借壳上市监管制度下的曲线借壳上市模式。以创业板中万福生科先后两次被曲线借壳为研究对象,利用其公告从曲线借壳双方的股权结构进行深入分析,探索其曲线借壳上市的路径,进而针对标的公司运用曲线借壳模式成功上市的案例进行总结思考。最后提出监管建议,限制创业板曲线借壳上市。     

我国企业借壳上市方式对其上市成败影响的研究

本文对借壳上市方式进行了科学系统的划分,根据壳公司控制权取得方式的不同将借壳方式分为资产性的借壳方式和股权性的借壳方式;选取了2007~2012年我国A股市场上借壳上市的企业作为样本,通过Logistic回归分析,得出盈利能力差的壳公司更容易使得借壳上市成功,采用资产性的借壳上市方式更容易使得借壳上市成功。     

国元证券 行业景气 业绩飞涨

公司7月3日公告国元证券借壳上市方案获批股价目前仍在停牌阶段证券行业高度景气,公司业绩迅猛增长国元证券借壳S*ST化二方案于2007年7月3日获得中国证监会有条件通过,但尚未公布其正式报告书。国元证券成立于安徽省,从股东结构上可以发现其带有明显的安徽省     

借壳上市的过程控制难题

借壳上市的实行过程中.一旦出现难以控制的问题,则很可能借壳失败.控制难题大致分为两类,一是风险,主要是来自监管的风险；一是不和谐,是指收购过程中的中小投资者利益保护和劳资纠纷等.现实的复杂性既回答了借壳上市过程中出现问题的出处,也相应给出了这些问题的解决之道.     

打破金融业“风险大锅饭”机制的意义与途径

我国现行金融业风险处置成本分担机制的特征及影响 从理论上说，可能承担金融风险处置成本的主体包括：金融机构股东、机构债权人、个人债权人、地方政府、中央财政、中央银行。按照市场经济原则，政府不应当在金融活动中承担过多的风险，只有让市场主体自己承担风险才能使金融市场健康发展，因此金融风险处置成本应当主要由前三类主体来承担，这也是成熟市场经济国家的通行做法。然而考察我国已有的金融风险处置案例，却可以发现一些不同于成熟市场经济国家的特点。概括来看，格局大体如下：中央银行和中央财政是最为主要的金融风险处置成本承担者，金融机构股东尽管名义上以其注册资本为限承担责任，由于存在注资不实或者违规抽回注册资本等问题，金融机构股东在金融风险处置中可能事实上并未真正承担多少成本；地方政府承担少量或者基本不承担成本；个人债权人甚至无需承担任何成本；只有机构债权人是基本按照权责对称的市场经济原则来承担金融风险处置的成本。由于中央银行和中央财政的资金均具有公共性，将其用于金融风险处置事实上是一种变相的转移支付。     

证券公司并购重组双方股东策略研究

由于历史原因,我国证券公司的并购重组在实践过程中多数采用的是政府主导模式,但这并不始终是个常态。随着我国证券市场的扩容以及监管政策日趋成熟,我国证券公司股权结构趋于合理,证券公司作为微观主体对于并购重组问题更具有自主选择的机会。本文首先利用博弈论对证券公司在市场主导的并购重组过程中双方股东利益的博弈进行详细分析,然后考虑市价持股机会成本因素,以每股收益比和每股收益率不被稀释为约束条件,确定双方股东换股比率的博弈区间。从理论上为并购重组过程中双方股东决策及利益平衡问题提供一种较为科学合理的新思路。     

引入资本成本的商业银行绩效评估研究

采用以经济资本为基础的业绩评价模式,能改变传统业绩评价体系重利润、轻风险的弊端。将商业银行获得的收益和承担的风险结合起来评估业绩,可减少因代理问题而引发的银行管理者和股东之间的目标差异,实现股东利益最大化,提高商业银行价值。     

政策法规

证监会修改上市公司重大资产重组规定 中国证监会8月5日发布了《关于修改上市公司重火资产重组与配套融资相关规定的决定》,以进一步规范、引导借壳上市活动,拓宽兼并重组融资渠道。新规将借壳上市界定为：自控制权发生变更之日起,上市公司向收购人购买的资产总额占上市公司最近一个会计年度经审计的合并财务会计报告期末资产总额的比例达到100％以上的交易行为。《决定》要求,拟借壳对应的经营实体持续经营时间应当在3年以上,最近两个会计年度净利润均为正数且累计超过人民币2000万元。借壳上市完成后,上市公司与控股股东、     

股东套利行为与企业融资方式选择

股东的出资行为对企业融资方式的选择具有决定性作用。对于正常经营的企业，为了发挥债务资本的税蔽效应和杠杆作用，股东往往愿意企业负债经营，但是负债的对象不一定是普通债权人，很可能是股东自身；对于陷入财务危机的企业，为套牢普通债权人获得更多的企业重组收益，股东也愿意“自我负债”融资。通过债务性资本与替权益性资本的替换，股东总能够获得套利收益，但同时也损害了普通债权人和政府的收益，因而受到法律的限制。然而，在现实经济中股东的套利空间仍然存在，并对企业的融资方式选择，尤其是对债务资本产生了深远的影响。     

我国证券公司上市模式的实践考察

从实践案例来看,我国证券公司的上市模式可以分为IPO上市、上市公司业务重组转型和借壳上市三种类型,其中借壳上市是目前的主流模式,又可以进一步细分为三种模式。本文结合具体案例比较分析了上述各种模式的操作特点及其优缺点。     

The impact of listing Latin American ADRs on the risks and returns of the underlying shares

This paper examines the risks and returns of Latin American stocks following American depository receipt (ADR) listings in U.S. equity markets and finds no systematic change in their volatility. This finding differs from previous results for ADR introduction on European and Asian stocks, although it is consistent with several prior findings on international stock listings. Importantly, it supports the predictions of Domowitz, Glen, and Madhavan's 1998 model of international cross-listings. This model predicts that the effects of such listings will differ across stocks because the net effect is indicative of the specific trade-off for each individual stock between benefits of enhanced intermarket competition and costs stemming from the diversion of information-linked orders out of the domestic market.     

The Cost of Capital of Cross‐listed Firms

This paper analyses the cost of capital of firms with foreign equity listings. Our purpose is to shed light on the question whether international and domestic asset pricing models yield a different estimate of the cost of capital for cross‐listed stocks. We distinguish between (i) the multifactor ICAPM of Solnik (1979) and Sercu (1980) including both the global market portfolio and exchange rate risk premia and (ii) the single factor domestic CAPM. We test for the significance of the cost of capital differential in a sample of 336 cross‐listed stocks from nine countries in the period 1980–99. Our hypothesis is that the cost of capital differential is substantial for firms with international listings, as these are often large multinationals with a strong international orientation. We find that the asset pricing models yield a significantly different estimate of the cost of capital for only 12% of the cross‐listed companies. The size of the cost of capital differential is around 50 basis points for the US, 80 basis points for the UK and 100 basis points for France.     

Evidence and Implications of Increases in Trading Volume Around Exchange Listings

After controlling for market volume trends and differences in volume measurement between the Nasdaq and the exchanges, we find that mean trading volumes increase significantly for Nasdaq stocks that list on the Amex or the NYSE. Furthermore, stocks with low (high) pre‐listing volume tend to realize the largest volume increases (decreases) as well as the best (worst) post‐listing performance. Our results support the hypothesis that stocks with high past trading volumes tend to experience lower future returns, and shed new light on the nature and possible causes of poor post‐listing stock performance.     

Is the Compensation Model for Real Estate Brokers Obsolete?

This study examines the traditional compensation model for real estate brokers under which both the listing and buyer brokers are paid by the seller based on a percentage of the property sales price. We argue that this model has not evolved to reflect contemporary legal agency relationships and technology-driven information availability. It therefore creates substantial transactional inefficiencies for buyers and sellers at both the matching and bargaining stages of a transaction. While there is evidence that market forces are pushing for a change in the status quo, there is also evidence that the brokerage industry is resisting this change by pursuing anti-competitive policies and laws. We explore the economics of the current and alternative compensation structures and suggest policy implications regarding anti-competitive behavior in the brokerage industry.

中国企业海外上市市盈率比较研究

本文通过对2000-2006年中国上市公司在境内外市场市盈率的比较分析，研究了我国企业境外上市的估值效果。文章发现，中国上市公司在境内市场的市盈率水平高于境外市场；香港和新加坡给予了中国大陆公司不同的评价：中国大陆上市公司在香港主板的市盈率高于香港本地公司，而中国上市公司在新加坡主板的市盈率低于新加坡本土公司；没有证据表明A—H股的跨境上市形式提高了A股估值，但A—H股在一定程度上提升了H股的估值。     

The valuation effects of overseas listings: The case of the Tokyo Stock Exchange

Shareholders of U.S. firms that listed stock on the Tokyo Stock Exchange from 1973 to 1989 are shown to have experienced no significant wealth gains. The pattern of the market's reaction to a Tokyo listing tracks closely the reactions to a domestic listing, where gains prior to listing are later erased. The findings indicate no advantages to a listing for a firm with a prior business presence in Japan, and they do not support the hypothesis of diminishing returns to foreign listings. The findings are consistent with the integration of international capital markets.     

European Managerial Perceptions of the Net Benefits of Foreign Stock Listings

This study surveys the European managers on the costs, benefits, and net benefits of foreign listing. Increase in prestige and visibility, and growth in shareholders are perceived as the major benefits, and the costs of public relations and legal fees are cited as the major costs by the managers. While a majority of managers (60%) perceive that benefits outweigh the costs of foreign listing, about 30% also view the net benefits to be negative. Perceived net benefits are positively related to the increase in the total trading volume after foreign listing, the financial disclosure levels of the firm, and the dual listing on both the US and European foreign exchanges. Without the influence of these factors, the perceived net benefits are negative.     

The Dark Side of International Cross‐Listing: Effects on Rival Firms at Home

We analyse the stock price impact of firms' US cross‐listing on home‐market rival firms. Using an empirical event study approach we find negative cumulative average abnormal returns for the rival firms around both the listing and announcement of listing dates. The evidence suggests both positive and negative spillover effects on rival firms, where the dominant effect is that investors see rivals at a relative disadvantage to the cross‐listing firm. As firms cross‐list in the US and commit to the increased disclosure and investor protection associated with the US listing, they are better able to take advantage of growth opportunities relative to their non cross‐listing counterparts, and this results in negative spillover effects on rival firms. Our results are consistent with the idea that firms cross‐list as a means to reduce agency costs of controlling shareholders and thus are able to exploit growth opportunities as they have better access to external finance.     

The Timing and Subsequent Performance of Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange

Companies that have listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange by means of a public offering between 1980 and 1991 have subsequently performed poorly. This long run post issue performance is remarkably consistent with the South African evidence for seasoned rights issuing companies and the international evidence for both initial public offerings (IPOs) and seasoned equity offerings (SEOs). Over the four years post issue, the newly listed companies earned an average return of 18.0% as opposed to 81.5% for a size-matched sample of seasoned companies. This study adds to the increasing body of international evidence suggesting the IPO under performance 'puzzle' referred to by Ibbotson (1975), Loughran and Ritter (1995) and Spiess and Affleck-Graves (1995) is not simply sample or country specific.     

Determinants of Investor Demand for Cross‐Listed Firms

By focusing on the decisions of investors to invest in cross‐listed stocks, this paper presents new evidence on why we observe striking differences in the percentage of trade in foreign markets for cross‐listed stocks. With a large sample of Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) stocks cross‐listed in the U.S. and Canada, we document the effect of investor recognition and risk characteristics on the distribution of trading volume. Firms that are more visible to American investors are traded more heavily in the U.S. At the same time, firms that offer diverse risk characteristics are attractive to Americans. While investors understand the benefits of international diversification, as they are attracted to stocks that are different (e.g., the stock of small firms with few assets in the U.S.), they also seek stocks that provide them with high returns.