论有限合伙在我国风险投资中的应用优势

近年来,风险投资在我国快速发展,风险投资企业的组织形式一直是人们探讨的问题。新《合伙企业法》的颁布实施,正式确立了有限合伙制的地位,风险投资企业纷纷转向建立有限合伙制企业。产生这种局面,必是有限合伙制具有某些与风险投资相适应的优势。对有限合伙制在风险投资中的优势进行了总结。     

浅谈风险投资与有限合伙

风险投资是中小企业融资的重要途径,有限合伙是企业组织形式中的重要形式,风险投资与有限合伙的结合是一种双赢的结合,本文分析了风险投资选择有限合伙的原因。     

资本与知本牵手 有限与合伙联姻

有钱的人出钱,然后做甩手掌柜的;有知识的人出智慧,然后把货币变成增值资本,前者以实际出资额对企业承担有限责任,后者承担无限责任。这种资本与知本各取所需,把有限与合伙结合起来的新型的风险投资企业形式,日前在北京市工商局开始登记注册,这是中关村科技园区条例和有限合伙管理办法颁布以后全国首次出现的以有限合伙组织形式构成的风险投资企业。     

开创我国合伙制度的新时代——新《合伙企业法》的创新解读

新修订的《合伙企业法》具有多方面的突破:主要是增加了"有限合伙"制度;"有限责任合伙"制度;明确了法人和其他组织可以参与合伙等。这给我国原本形式单一化的合伙制度注入了新的生机和活力,对促进风险投资和中小企业的发展,提高我国专业服务机构的竞争力,做大做强合伙企业起到了重大作用。新《合伙企业法》的贯彻和实施将对我国市场经济的发展起到促进和规范的作用。     

浅谈合伙企业投资的核算及其对投资者的影响

自1969年美国第一家风险投资机构采用有限合伙企业制度以来,目前已有超过80%的风险投资机构采用这种模式。合伙企业制度将不参与经营,但拥有财力的合伙人与拥有专业知识以及投资技巧的合伙人通过契约关系联合起来,该模式既有强大的融资功能,又能有效地降低经营风险,在风险投资行业中被广泛运用。     

合伙企业法修订草案新增有限合伙内容

不久前首次提请全国人大常委会会议审议的合伙企业法修订草案新增“有限合伙的特殊规定”一章,将合伙人的范围扩大为自然人、法人和其他经济组织,明确规定法人可以参与合伙。有关专家认为,这些增加的规定有利于推动风险投资事业的发展。风险投资常用的组织形式是有限合伙,即在至少有一名合伙人承担无限责任的基础上,允许其他合伙人承担有限责任,从而将具有投资管理经验或技术研发能力的机构或个人与具有资金实力的投资机构有效结合起来。此外,专家还指出,这些增加的规定有望解决我国专业服务机构发展的“瓶颈”问题。有限责任合伙中各合伙人…     

试论构建我国的有限合伙法律制度

随着风险投资在我国的发展,设立有限合伙企业成为现实生活中的一个需求,并在生活中成为一个现实的存在,自然的,设立有限合伙企业的相关的法律和经济问题成为了现在法学界和经济学界的关注焦点。从促进风险投资的角度出发,本文笔者认为应尽快制定《有限合伙企业法》,为有限合伙企业提供存在的法律依据,并制定和修改相关立法,如:税法,建立完善的有限合伙企业制度。一、我国有限合伙企业立法的意义和法律障碍(一)我国有限合伙企业立法的意义——从我国风险投资的发展角度讨论1、有限合伙企业能够促进风险投资的发展风险投资是一种由确定多数或…     

浅谈我国《合伙企业法》中有限合伙制度

20世纪90年代,国际上出现的一种新的责任形式,即有限合伙,它主要适用于专业服务机构.我国新修订的《合伙企业法》,其中就增加了有限合伙制度,为风险投资扫清了法律的障碍,促进科技创新投入.但有限合伙在经营管理中也存在着弊端.     

浅谈有限合伙在我国风险投资中的应用障碍及对策分析

风险投资在我国起步较晚,但发展势头迅猛,成为我国经济增长中不可忽略的一股强大力量。2007年新《合伙企业法》对有限合伙的肯定,使得风险投资企业纷纷转向成立有限合伙企业。风险投资与有限合伙的结合固然有其不可替代的优势,但在实践中也暴露出一些问题。本文就有限合伙对于风险投资的制度障碍进行了分析和总结。     

有限合伙制度研究

有限合伙因其结合了有限责任公司投资风险有限性和普通合伙的合理避税优势,成为国外早已流行多年的商事主体形式。我国于2006年8月通过了修订的《合伙企业法》,增加了＂有限合伙＂这一新的商事主体形式,为风险投资扫清了法律的障碍,促进科技创新投入。在这种情势下投资者选择有限合伙的商事主体形式,较之选择公司、普通合伙,能最大限度地实现其自身利益。但是我国立法关于有限合伙的保护仍有一些不足,投资者必须谨慎地运用合伙协议来弥补法律之不足,以防利益被普通合伙人侵害。     

风险投资有限合伙制激励约束机制研究

有限合伙制对发展风险投资有着重要的金融经济价值,是我国风险投资事业发展的一个前进方向。对有限合伙制中基金与管理人、项目遴选、项目经理人、投资对象和有关专家聘用等五个方面的激励与约束机制进行分析,结果表明,有限合伙制的利益激励与风险约束相对称,构成了风险投资系统的两个方面,二者共同作用保证了风险投资收益的可靠性。现阶段,我国发展有限合伙制,就激励与约束机制而言,应尽快完善有限合伙制的相关法律体系。     

公司制与有限合伙制风险投资机构在我国适用性比较

本文通过论述有限合伙制风险投资机构在美国取得成功的外部条件,以及中美在法律制度、历史传统、文化影响等宏观方面的差异,指出有限合伙制风险投资机构不适合我国在经济体制转轨阶段的需要,反驳了我国许多学者的观点。然后论述了我国实行公司制风险投资机构的优势,说明在当前的发展阶段公司制的组织形式更适合我国风险投资机构。最后指出不断修正的有限合伙制和公司制存在趋同的趋势。     

新《合伙企业法》有限合伙制度的立法缺陷与克服

2006年修订的我国《合伙企业法》首次确立了有限合伙制度.有限合伙制度的精髓在于"糅合"了公司和普通合伙"两种制度"的优点,但新法在两种制度的"糅合"上还存在着未充分认识到有限合伙中两种投资的性质和资本制度的构建等方面的缺陷;两种责任的适用范围及转化的规定比较模糊;两种合伙人转换条件以及转换后的权利义务设计不合理等.应区分"两种制度"的宗旨、功能、适用条件等构建有限合伙制度,同时也应对有限合伙中两种责任及两种合伙人的转化设计合理的径路.     

有限合伙制刍议

高新技术的发展对传统的投资方式和产权制度提出了挑战,高风险相对应的高收益直接带来了风险投资的出现及企业产权制度的变革———有限合伙制的出现。有限合伙制在英、美等发达国家已经比较成熟,并带来了高新技术企业的迅猛发展。我国的有限合伙是在借鉴英美模式的基础上刚刚开始尝试,目前法律并没有做出明确的相关规定,而且原有的法律体系在某些方面还限制了有限合伙制的发展,如何让有效率的有限合伙制被中国的高科技企业和风险投资运用,还需要对相关的法律法规做出调整。     

美、日风险投资运作机制及其借鉴

美、日风险投资运作机制不同,导致两国风险投资发展效果迥异。美国风险投资公司以有限合伙制为其主流组织形式,有发达的私人权宜资本市场和二板市场作为风险资本进入和退出的渠道,并且也形成了适宜于风险投资发展的人才和文化环境。而日本风险投资公司的组织形式、二板市场状况和文化环境等条件都难与风险投资发展的内在要求相适应。我国目前风险投资发展中存在许多问题,对美、日风险投资运作机制的分析能为我国发展风险投资提供重要的借鉴作用。     

Agency costs,institutions, learning,and taxation in venture capital contracting

This paper introduces a data set on forms of finance used in 12,363 Canadian and US venture capital (VC) and private equity financings of Canadian entrepreneurial firms from 1991 to 2003. The data comprise different types of venture capital institutions, including corporate, limited partnership, government, and labour-sponsored funds as well as US funds that invest in Canadian entrepreneurial firms. Unlike prior work with US venture capitalists financing US entrepreneurial firms, the data herein indicate that convertible preferred equity has never been the most frequently used form of finance for either US or Canadian venture capitalists financing Canadian entrepreneurial firms, regardless of the definition of the term ‘venture capital’. A syndication example and a simple theoretical framework are provided to show the nonrobustness of prior theoretical work on optimal financial contracts in venture capital finance. Multivariate empirical analyses herein indicate that (1) security design is a response to expected agency problems, (2) capital gains taxation affects contracts, (3) there are trends in the use of different contracts which can be interpreted as learning, and (4) market conditions affect contracts.     

Publicly traded venture capital funds: implications for institutional “fund of funds” investors

Institutional investors supply the bulk of the funds which are used by venture capital investment firms in financing emerging growth companies. These investors typically place their funds in a number of venture capital firms, thus achieving diversification across a range of investment philosophy, geography, management, industry, investment life cycle stage and type of security. Essentially, each institutional investor manages a “fund of funds,” attempting through the principles of portfolio theory to reduce the risk of participating in the venture capital business while retaining the up-side potential which was the original source of attraction to the business. Because most venture capital investment firms are privately held limited partnerships, it is very difficult to measure risk adjusted rates of return on these funds on a continuous basis.In this paper, we use the set of twelve publicly traded venture capital firms as a proxy to develop insight regarding the risk reduction effect of investment in a portfolio of venture capital funds, i.e., a fund of funds. Measurements of weekly total returns for the shares of these funds are compared with similar returns on a set of comparably sized “maximum capital gain” mutual funds and the daily return of the S&P 500 Index. A comparison of returns on an individual fund basis, as well as a correlation of daily returns of these individual funds, were made. In order to adjust for any systematic bias resulting from the “thin market” characteristic of the securities of the firms being observed, the Scholes-Williams beta estimation technique was used to reduce the effects of nonsynchronous trading.The results indicate that superior returns are realized on such portfolios when compared with portfolios of growth-oriented mutual funds and with the S&P 500 Index. This is the case whether the portfolios are equally weighted (i.e., “naive”) or constructed to be mean-variant efficient, ex ante, according to the capital asset pricing model. When compared individually, more of the venture funds dominated the S&P Market Index than did the mutual funds and by much larger margins. When combined in portfolios, the venture capital funds demonstrated very low beta coefficients and very low covariance of returns among portfolio components when compared with portfolios of mutual funds. To aid in interpreting these results, we analyzed the discounts and premia from net asset value on the funds involved and compared them to Thompson's findings regarding the contribution of such differences to abnormal returns. We found that observed excess returns greatly exceed the level which would be explained by these differences.The implications of these results for the practitioner are significant. They essentially tell us that, while investment in individual venture capital deals is considered to have high risk relative to potential return, combinations of deals (i.e., venture capital portfolios) were shown to produce superior risk adjusted returns in the market place. Further, these results show that further combining these portfolios into larger portfolios (i.e., “funds of funds”) provides even greater excess returns over the market index, thus plausibly explaining the “fund of funds” approach to venture capital investment taken by many institutional investors.While the funds studied are relatively small and are either small business investment companies or business development companies, they serve as a useful proxy for the organized venture capital industry, despite the fact that the bulk of the funds in the industry are institutionally funded, private, closely held limited partnerships which do not trade continuously in an open market. These results demonstrate to investors the magnitude of the differences in risk adjusted total return between publicly traded venture capital funds and growth oriented mutual funds on an individual fund basis. They also demonstrate to investors the power of the “fund of funds” approach to institutional involvement in the venture capital business. Because such an approach produces better risk adjusted investment results for the institutional investor, it seems to justify a greater flow of capital into the business from more risk averse institutional investment sources. This may mean greater access to institutional funds for those seeking to form new venture capital funds. For entrepreneurs seeking venture capital funds for their young companies, it may also mean a lower potential cost of capital for the financing of business venturing. From the viewpoint of public policy makers interested in facilitating the funding of business venturing, it may provide insight regarding regulatory issues surrounding taxation and the barriers and incentives which affect venture capital investment.     

制度学习、网络中心性和市场进入——跨国风险资本在华投资的实证研究

在我国风险投资市场不断繁荣而且跨国风险投资大量涌进的背景下,本文主要运用清科数据库2001年1月1日到201 0年1 2月31日的数据进行分析,研究发现跨国风险投资机构的网络中心性对"制度学习一市场进入"的关系具有中介作用。跨国风险投资机构不同的联合投资网络中心性对制度学习正向影响市场进入的影响作用不同,其中中介中心性的影响作用最大,表明跨国风险资本充当其他风险投资机构网络联结的中介具有重要的作用。在此基础上,本研究对跨国风险投资机构和本土风险投资机构的实践及联合投资网络的运作提出相应的建议,以期推动我国风险投资产业的有序发展。     

The role of venture capital in financing small business

Venture capital is a primary and unique source of funding for small firms because these firms (with sales and/or assets under $5 million) have very limited access to traditional capital markets. Venture capital is a substitute, but not a perfect substitute, for trade credit, bank credit, and other forms of financing for small firms. Small businesses are not likely to be successful in attracting venture capital unless the firms have the potential to provide extraordinary returns to the venture capitalist.This study provides an analysis of a survey of venture capital firms that participate in small business financing. The survey participants are venture capital firms that were 1986 members of the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), the largest venture capital association in the United States.The average size of the venture capital firms responding to the survey is $92 million dollars in assets, with a range from $600 thousand to $500 million. Twenty-three percent of the respondents have total assets below $20 million, and 27% have assets above $100 million.The venture capitalists' investment (assets held) in small firms delineate the supply of venture capital to small firms. Sixty-three of the 92 venture capitalists' have more than 70% of their assets invested in small firms.The venture capitalists were asked how their investment plans might change with changes in the tax law that were projected in the spring of 1986. Fifty-four percent expected to increase their investments in small firms, and 38% did not expect to change these activities.Venture capitalists are very selective in allocating their resources. The average number of annual requests that a venture capitalist receives is 652, and the median number is 500: only 11.5 of the respondents receive more than 1,000 proposals per year.     

An institutional view of China's venture capital industry: Explaining the differences between China and the West

Institutional theory argues that institutions in general, and culture in particular, shape the actions of firms and individuals in a number of subtle but substantive ways. The theory has been used to explain a number of significant and substantive managerial differences found in different parts of the world. To date, the examination of venture capital outside the US and Europe, however, has been rather limited. Institutional theory also suggests that there would be differences in how venture capital may operate in other parts of the world, such as Asia where the culture is substantially different from the West. Based on interviews with 36 venture capitalists in 24 venture capital firms investing in China, this exploratory research finds that China's institutional environment creates a number of significant differences from the West. The article discusses the impact of these findings on future research on Asian venture capital, theory development, and the activities of venture capital professionals in that region.