Insider Trading around Dividend Announcements: Theory and Evidence

The informational role of strategic insider trading around corporate dividend announcements is studied based on the efficient equilibrium in a signalling model with endogenous insider trading. Insider trading immediately prior to the announcement of dividend initiations has significant explanatory power. For firms with insider selling prior to the dividend initiation announcement, the excess returns are negative and significantly lower than for the remaining firms (with no insider trading or just insider buying) as implied by our model. Another implication is that dividend increases may elicit a positive or negative stock price response depending on the firm's investment opportunities.     

The Effect of Managerial Ownership on the Short- and Long-run Response to Cash Distributions

We examine both the short‐run and long‐run responses to the following corporate cash flow transactions: dividend increases and decreases, dividend initiations, and tender offer repurchases. Our focus is the short‐run and long‐run effects of managerial ownership. We hypothesize that ownership plays an important role in explaining the announcement effects for these events, owing to signaling effects and the reduction of agency problems. Our short‐run results accord well with the earlier work on announcement effects for these events and show that firms with high insider ownership exhibit higher excess returns. Our long‐term results indicate a drift over a three‐year period following the announcement, with the excess returns for the high insider‐ownership group becoming more pronounced.     

Further Evidence on Insider Selling Prior to Seasoned Equity Offering Announcements: The Role of Growth Opportunities

Previous research documents significant abnormal net selling by insiders prior to seasoned equity offering announcements. This study documents that the abnormal net selling is significantly greater for growth firms than for mature firms. It also shows that growth firms experience poorer post-issue long-term price performance, which suggests greater overpricing for growth firms. Further analysis shows that greater insider selling prior to the offering announcement is associated with a greater price run-up prior to the announcement and is not associated with a more negative market reaction to the announcement. Overall, the results suggest that investors may be overly optimistic about future prospects of growth firms.     

Trading on inside information: Evidence from the share-structure reform in China

We examine stock trading activities in days before Chinese listed firms made public announcement to start share-structure reform. There is significant evidence that, relative to a benchmark period, institutional investors bought more event firms’ shares in the last two trading days prior to announcement. Randomization tests show significant differences in institutional trading activities between event firms and matched control firms, which suggests that some institutions had inside information. Moreover, large trades account for a significant proportion of daily stock price changes in the last 2 days. The evidence is consistent with the prediction by Holden and Subrahmanyam (1992) that, when multiple informed investors acquire the same piece of information, they will trade aggressively. We also find that over the reform period, the median share value change of event firms is 6% higher than that of control firms. Our findings have important implications for enforcement of insider trading regulations in China.     

Takeover defenses and wealth effects on securityholders: The case of poison pill adoptions

This is the first study to examine the valuation effects of any antitakeover amendment on both bondholders and stockholders. We present new evidence documenting that, on average, there is a significant wealth loss experienced by bondholders at poison pill adoption announcement, while stockholders are unaffected. Our finding of significant bondholder losses is consistent with the proposed negative signal hypothesis. We document results which indicate that bondholders correctly anticipate the degree of leverage increase at the time of the announcement. We also show that the proportion of insider ownership is negatively related to bondholder wealth effect at announcement. This supports the notion that higher insider (manager) ownership leads to a greater alignment of manager-stockholder interests while increasing the stockholder-bondholder agency costs. Long-run analysis of leverage and performance measures reveal that pill adopting firms are not under-leveraged as compared to their industry rivals. However, supporting the negative signal hypothesis, the leverage of sample firms rises significantly after the pill adoption. Performance measures reveal that sample firms significantly underperform their industry cohorts. This result suggests that poison pill adoptions are motivated by poor managers attempting to immunize themselves from the disciplinary actions of the corporate control market.     

Poison Pill Securities: Shareholder Wealth and Insider Trading

Existing empirical studies on poison pill securities have examined their overall effect on shareholder wealth. This paper segregates the wealth-increasing poison pills from the value-reducing ones by examining the pattern of insider trading activity prior to the pill adoption announcement. Our results show that pill adoptions that are preceded by net insider purchases are associated with significant stock price increases. This finding is consistent with the proposition that corporate insiders buy their own securities because they do not view the adoption of poison pills as an antitakeover strategy, but rather one that enables the board of directors to extract a greater share of the economic gains from the bidder. Our findings also indicate that firms with net insider sales prior to pill adoption announcement experience generally negative but insignificant changes in value. Finally, firms with no insider trading or with an equal number of insider purchases and sales register marginally significant negative returns.     

Insider ownership and signals: evidence from stock split announcement effects

This study examines whether investors regard the level of insider ownership of a firm as useful for evaluating stock split decisions. Results show that the abnormal returns at the announcement of stock splits are positively related to the level of insider ownership. The results prevail even after controlling for other relevant factors. Further analysis indicates the positive relation exists for small firms, but not for large firms. This indicates the market evaluates stock split decisions within the context of both insider ownership and information asymmetry.     

INFORMATION CONTENT OF QUALIFIED AUDIT OPINIONS FOR OVER-THE-COUNTER FIRMS

This study investigates the information content of the initial public announce-ment of an audit qualification for a sample of American firms traded over-the-counter. These firms have smaller predisclosure information sets than New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and American Stock Exchange (ASE) firms. The results of research focusing on NYSE and ASE firms cannot, therefore, be extended to the over-the-counter (OTC) market. When the qualification is not confined to a 'bad news' scenario, a significant market reaction to the announcement is found, indicating that audit qualification announcements for OTC firms do, indeed, have information content.     

Underpricing,Share Overhang,and Insider Selling in Follow‐on Offerings

Prospect and information‐momentum theories predict that insiders can offer fewer shares in an initial public offering (IPO) to create informational momentum and obtain higher prices in follow‐on offerings. I find that dilution and insider participation in the IPO are negatively related to the number and size of follow‐on offerings, consistent with the prediction. However, insider selling in follow‐on offerings is positively related to IPO selling, contrary to the theories. Returns around follow‐on offering announcements are more negative for newly public firms than older firms, but for newly public firms do not differ by whether the announcement comes before or after the lockup expiration date.     

Who benefited from the disclosure mandates of the 1964 Securities Acts Amendments?

The 1964 Securities Acts Amendments extended disclosures mandated of NYSE firms to most firms trading in the Over-the-Counter (OTC) market. Although some prior evidence suggests substantial value increases for OTC firms due to the “value enhancing” mandated disclosures, we find no statistical difference in announcement returns for OTC firms moving to the NYSE before and after the legislation. One purported advantage to investors from the 1964 legislation was increased financial reporting. Yet, we document that the bulk of OTC firms analyzed in prior studies was already providing investors financial information before the legislation. Apparently, investors did not value the mandated disclosures. We do find evidence that the NYSE benefited from the legislation by increasing the number of OTC firms switching to their exchange around its passage.     

Stock splits to profit insider trading: Lessons from an emerging market

Stock splits have long presented financial puzzles: Why are they undertaken? Why are they associated with abnormal returns? Abnormal returns, particularly those coming shortly before a split’s announcement date, should raise strong suspicions of insider trading, particularly in nations with weak regulatory structures. We examined the 718 split events in the emerging stock market of Vietnam from 2007 through 2011. We found evidence consistent with illegal insider trading, particularly in firms that were vulnerable to insider manipulation and, therefore, more likely to split their stocks. When vulnerable firms’ stocks did split, they provided significant excess short-term returns. Tellingly, the abnormal returns on those stocks prior to the split announcements were also extremely high, indeed higher than their abnormal post-announcement returns. Moreover, trading volume increased prior to the split announcement date. This suspicious pattern is what we would expect if insiders were trading on their knowledge. We propose that illegal insider trading in contexts where it is possible to escape serious penalty provides a previously undiscussed and cogent explanation for both stock splits and abnormal short-term returns.     

Insider trading in rumored takeover targets

We examine insider trading surrounding takeover rumors in a sample of 1,642 publicly traded US firms. Using difference-in-differences regressions, we find that insider net purchases increase within the year prior to the first publication of a takeover rumor, particularly when rumor articles are either accurate (lead to a takeover announcement) or informative (provide substantial justification for the rumor's publication). Moreover, we find abnormal insider trading to be a significant predictor of takeover announcements occurring within the following year. Finally, passive net purchasing (i.e., selling less rather than buying more) is more pronounced among managing insiders than among non-managing insiders.     

Can insiders bail themselves out before private renegotiation?

This study examines insider trading for a sample of firms that announce a workout agreement, controlling for both successful and unsuccessful workout attempts. I find that insider trading activity is related to the outcome of the workout proposal. Managers tend to bail out (sell shares) of firms that are unsuccessful in the workout process while they purchase shares prior to the workout announcements if the firms are ultimately successful in their workout. In addition, the evidence suggests managerial trading behavior is related to the workout market reaction. When a workout announcement is preceded by insider buying (selling), the stock price reaction is positive (negative). Overall, the evidence presented in this article is consistent with the notion that insider transactions convey private information to the stock market about a financially distressed firm.     

INSIDER TRADING EFFECTS ON STOCK RETURNS AROUND OPEN-MARKET STOCK REPURCHASE ANNOUNCEMENTS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

In this paper we empirically examine the effects of insider trading activities, the percentage of common shares outstanding authorized for repurchase, and management ownership on stock returns around open-market stock repurchase announcements. The study is conducted on a sample of 204 firms that announced open-market stock repurchases between 1982 and 1990. Results show that insider trading activities during the month that immediately precedes the announcement have a significant effect. While stockholders of firms with insider net selling activities earn positive excess returns, those of firms with insider net buying activities earn larger and more significant excess returns. Insider trading activities during more distant periods do not show any effects on stock returns. Results also indicate that management ownership has a significant positive effect on stock returns, and this effect is more positive when the percentage of common shares outstanding authorized for repurchase is large.     

Prebid Run‐Ups Ahead of Canadian Takeovers: How Big Is the Problem?

This paper studies the price‐volume dynamics ahead of takeover announcements for 399 Canadian firms from 1985 to 2002. I find evidence consistent with insiders trading illegally, creating both abnormal returns (ARs) and abnormal turnover (AT) ahead of the announcement. The rise in AT begins far ahead of the actual announcement, accompanied by ARs in the last five trading days, consistent with more informed trading. Data on disclosed insider trading indicate a sharp increase in volume prior to the takeover announcement, suggesting that insiders make use of private information. This study confirms the importance of AT for triggering an insider trading investigation.     

Do insiders trade on innovation?

We find that pure insider share purchases—which we define as insider purchases over two successive years without any corresponding sales—are a strong predictor of a firm’s patent applications. The predictability increases with the quality of the patent: Applications for the highest-quality, breakthrough patents increase by 21% in the year following pure insider purchases in our sample. These purchases are associated with large abnormal stock returns of 1.1% per month (14% annualized) over the subsequent three-year period. We also document that stock price responds less to the subsequent announcement of the grant of patent if the application for the patent has been preceded by pure insider purchases, consistent with the idea that insider purchases reveal information about future firm innovation. Our evidence has implications for understanding insider trading within technology companies that have become a dominant feature of US stock markets in recent decades.     

Is the market underreacting or overreacting to open market share repurchases? A UK perspective

Using UK open market repurchases, we reject the market underreaction hypothesis and the market overreaction hypothesis proposed by Ikenberry et al. (1995) and Peyer and Vermaelen (2009), respectively. The evidence suggests that the UK market reacts slowly to actual repurchases made by value firms. UK repurchases on average do not suffer from share undervaluation prior to the announcement. Value firms perform just as well as glamour firms during the authorisation period but outperform glamour firms significantly 2 years following the announcement. It turns out that value firms repurchase over 6% more shares than glamour firms during the authorisation period.     

Hidden Gems: Do market participants respond to performance expectations revealed in compensation disclosures?

We find that a new compensation disclosure item on expected payouts from performance-based stock grants reveals unique information regarding future firm performance. Extracting inferred performance expectations from the disclosures, we find that firms disclosing the highest expected grant payout significantly outperform in ROA, Q, sales growth, and profit margin over the next two years, while those disclosing the lowest expected payout underperform. The embedded information is not captured by other information channels, such as managerial earnings guidance, 10-K sentiment, insider selling activities, unexplained CEO pay, and analyst forecasts. Investors and analysts do not fully incorporate the information and are later surprised around earnings announcement days. A portfolio that buys firms with the highest performance expectation and shorts firms with the lowest expectation earns significantly positive abnormal returns. Our findings suggest that the enhanced compensation disclosure contains valuable information, but investors underreact to information that is difficult to collect and process.     

Employee Downsizing Strategies: Market Reaction and Post Announcement Financial Performance

Empirical studies have generally reported insignificant market reactions to employee downsizing. In an effort to reconcile ongoing layoffs with inconclusive empirical results, we segregated our sample by downsizing strategy and examined employee layoff announcements made by Fortune 500 firms during the 1993–1995 period. Unlike previous studies, we find a positive market reaction for layoff announcements related to revenue refocusing. Market reaction with respect to layoff announcements involving cost cutting was insignificant while weak evidence was found for a negative market reaction to layoffs related to plant closings. Consistent with the market reaction, post announcement analysis revealed that downsizing in conjunction with revenue refocusing (plant closing) improved (reduced) firm financial performance and that revenue refocusing firms significantly outperformed cost cutting and plant closing firms over the three–year post announcement period.     

50+ Years of Diversification Announcements

This paper studies announcement returns from 4,764 mergers over 57 years to shed light on several controversies concerning corporate diversification. One prominent view is that diversification destroys value because of agency problems or internal investment distortions, but we find that combined (acquirer plus target) announcement returns are significantly positive for diversifying mergers throughout the period, and no lower than the returns for related mergers. The returns from diversifying acquisitions fell after 1980, and investors rewarded mergers involving financially constrained firms before but not after 1980, consistent with the idea that the value of internal capital markets declined over time.