国际信用卡公司所有权结构和公司治理的调整

2006年5月,万事达卡在纽约证券交易所上市;2008年3月,VISA在纽约证券交易所上市。两大国际信用卡公司对自身所有权结构和公司治理都进行了重大调整,不约而同地终止了多年来堪称成功的会员制组织形式,成为股份制上市公司。     

海外交易所竞争我国潜在上市资源情况分析及有关政策建议

2005年12月15日，无锡尚德公司在纽约证券交易所挂牌上市，融资近4亿美元，以当日收盘价计算的市值达到了30．67亿美元，远远超过新浪、盛大等已在纳斯达克上市的中国公司。在无锡尚德筹备发行上市的过程中，包括深交所在内的多家证券交易所加入这场对优秀企业的争夺战。最终，纽交所总裁一句“最好的企业要到最好的交易所上市”促使无锡尚德下定决心。然而，如若严格按照纽交所的标准，无锡尚德是不符合上市条件的，但为了争夺大量中国潜在的上市资源，纽交所却愿意对无锡尚德特别放行。事实上，近年来，世界各国交易所对中国潜在上市公司资源趋之若鹜，各大知名交易所纷纷登陆中国，我国潜在上市公司资源不断流失。百度、分众传媒、盛大……在这张被境外交易所竞争到的企业名单上有很多我国最具成长潜力的创新型企业。这一方面表明中国经济健康成长对国际资本具有巨大的吸引力，我国企业也通过国际资本市场提高了其国际竞争力，进而推动了我国经济建设，扩大了我国在国际市场的影响力；但是，另一方面，如果这种趋势持续发展下去。则忧多于喜。本文将对海外交易所对中国潜在上市公司资源竞相争夺的情况进行分析。     

提问:外资并购哪里打开突破口

外资并购中国上市公司是外国直接投资中国市场的一种方式. 国内上市公司产权制度改革已经完成,公司治理结构也在逐步完善,对外国战略买家的吸引力在增强.随着我国证券市场的不断发展成熟,股票一级市场发行机制从审批制向核准制转化,原来少数存在历史遗留问题的上市公司也已经较彻底地解决了产权方面的问题,而大部分的上市公司在上市之初就依照<公司法>和<证券法>进行了股份制改造.在解决了产权问题的基础上,经过一次又一次公司控制权之争的洗礼,上市公司的公司治理结构得到了市场的培育.许多上市公司已经摆脱了依附于大股东或为大股东所控制的局面,并形成了自己独立的"人格",有的上市公司甚至聘请了独立董事来参与公司重大事项的决策,以弥补大股东在专业技能方面的不足.     

国际并购浪潮下我国证券交易所的未来之路

随着市场的变化,证券交易所从早期的会员互助制机构逐步蜕变为非互助的公司,其中部分已经实现自我上市。在激烈的竞争压力下,交易所之间并购日益频繁。香港交易所作为非互助的上市公司,面临来自国外交易所和暗池交易平台的竞争压力。相反,由于法律限制和现实需要,大陆的交易所仍保持原先的结构,其受到的现实竞争压力不强。但是从长远看,大陆交易所有必要未雨绸缪、审时度势应对将来的竞争。不断加强深化大陆和香港交易所的合作是两地共同的应对之道。     

我国上市公司治理结构研究

随着市场经济的发展，我国的企业之间的竞争愈发激烈，因此为了加强企业的竞争能力，需要从其公司的整体结构进行调整，尤其在新上市的公司，更加需要对其调整，从公司结构上的调整能够对其以后稳步发展起着非常重要的作用，因此本文就关于新上市公司进行结构上的调整问题进行研究，根据国外的管理模式来应对我国的国情变化，寻求我国新上市公司的发展之路。以此来实现对公司管理的更高目标，为新上市公司的治理结构管理上提供相应的指导意见。     

第五部分 五省区证券市场分析

一、西北地区参与我国证券市场的基本情况截至2004年12月底,西北地区有上市公司96家,其中在上海交易所上市的公司有61家,在深圳交易所上市的公司35家(包括暂停上市的长岭股份有限公司);均为A股,无B股和H股;总股本258.95亿股,流通股本104.12亿股,总市值1276亿元,流通市值497亿元     

证券市场参与者之间关系及其变化的比较研究

本文主要探讨了证券市场主要参与者间关系及其变化。研究发现,与国外证券交易所之间的竞争不同,我国沪深两个交易所之间的竞争主要表现为监管竞争与对板块上市机会的主动争取上;证监会与交易所之间的关系是一种领导关系而非监管、合作关系;就证监会与被监管者而言,除监管关系以外,证监会与被监管者之间还存在着容忍、合谋等关系;上市公司与投资者之间的关系主要是一种合作与监督关系。     

证券市场应渐进改革停牌制度

我国停牌制度缺陷日渐凸显 一、停牌形式重于实质 目前,我国境内上市公司的停牌基本上由交易所管制,交易所在<上市规则>中详细地规定了在何种情况下需要停牌以及停牌的期限.上市公司出现类似的情况时将自动适用相应的条款,而不管公告消息是否真正会导致股价的异动,为停牌而停牌的现象甚为普遍.而境外各交易所的通行原则是发生重大事件需要公告时,上市公司先向保荐人和做市商事先咨询,确信将要公布的信息有可能引起交易的异常波动时才向交易所申请停牌.     

河南省上市公司资产重组现状分析

近几年来，我国上市公司的资产重组进入了高峰期，河南省上市公司在资产重组方面比较滞后，主要表现为起步晚、规模小、效果不明显。一些迫切需要重组的上市公司没有进行有效的重组，而重组规模比较大的几家上市公司在重组后效益反而下降。针对这些问题，我们对河南省上市公司资产重组状况进行了全面调查。现根据调查结果，就我省上市公司资产重组的现状与问题进行综合分析，进而探讨在当前的社会经济环境下我省上市公司进行资产重组的基本思路。　　一、河南省上市公司资产重组现状分析　　（一）上市公司资产重组效果不佳截至 2000年 12…     

外刊文摘

美国证交会放宽外国上市公司合规要求美国证交会(SEC)日前降低了在美上市的外国公司绕开《萨班斯-奥克斯利法》(Sarbanes-Oxley)的难度,从而解除了最令这些公司头疼的监管负担之一。     

The Geography of Equity Listing: Why Do Companies List Abroad?

This paper documents aggregate trends in the foreign listings of companies, and analyzes their distinctive prelisting characteristics and postlisting performance. In 1986–1997, many European companies listed abroad, mainly on U.S. exchanges, while the number of U.S. companies listed in Europe decreased. European companies that cross-list tend to be large and recently privatized firms, and expand their foreign sales after listing abroad. They differ sharply depending on where they cross-list: The U.S. exchanges attract high-tech and export-oriented companies that expand rapidly without significant leveraging. Companies cross-listing within Europe do not grow unusually fast, and increase their leverage after cross-listing.     

Competition and Cooperation among Exchanges: Effects on Corporate Cross‐Listing Decisions and Listing Standards

In recent years, many European companies have listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), and companies from emerging market countries such as Israel, China, and India have listed not only on the NYSE, but on various other American and European exchanges such as the Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange (LSE). At the same time, growing competition among exchanges has led to consolidation of the industry through mergers and alliances. In this article, the authors explore the main factors in corporate listing decisions as well as the expected effects on listing standards of both the growing competition and the recent wave of alliances and mergers among exchanges. When choosing an exchange, corporate issuers are likely to consider the listing requirements and reputations of the exchanges, as well as the sophistication of investors who trade on those exchanges and the extent of their knowledge of the firm's industry and business. As a general rule, value‐maximizing companies can be expected to list on the most reputable exchange they can, but may also choose listings (in some cases, dual or multiple listings) on less reputable (typically local) exchanges with more investors who are familiar with the issuer's industry or products. When setting their listing standards, publicly traded exchanges devote considerable attention to finding the optimal listing and disclosure standards, and may consider adjusting them to changes in circumstances. The setting and enforcement of the appropriate listing standards are the main determinant of an exchange's reputation, which in turn determines the kinds of companies that will choose to list on it. Exchanges with the highest listing standards and reputations are likely to work hard to maintain them, while exchanges with lesser reputations will seek to carve out niches by making opportunistic use of lower (though not too low) listing standards while possibly seeking alliances or mergers. But if less reputable exchanges use their lower listing standards (and fees) as a means of competing for listings with other exchanges, this will not necessarily lead to a “race to the bottom” in listing standards. Moreover, a merger between two exchanges is likely to result in a higher listing standard for the combined exchange than for (at least one of) the pre‐merger exchanges.     

Voluntary Financial Disclosure By Australian Listed Companies

As Australia becomes an increasingly important equity market, the level of information disclosed by Australian listed companies is likely to be of interest to a growing audience of prospective investors. This study tests the relation between five firm-specific variables drawn from agency theory and the general level of financial information voluntarily disclosed by companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange. The five variables are foreign listing status, firm size; leverage, assets-in-place and type of audit firm. The empirical evidence suggests that foreign listing status, firm size, and type of audit firm are significantly related to the level of information voluntarily disclosed by listed companies.     

Investor Protection,Investment Efficiency and Value: The Case of Cross‐Listed Firms

We examine the impact of improved investor protection due to cross‐listing on foreign firms’ investment decisions and firm value. While we find that cross‐listing increases firms’ capital expenditures and mergers and acquisitions activities, cross‐listed firms also invest more in research and development, make better acquisition decisions, and have higher profitability compared to non‐cross‐listed firms. Moreover, cross‐listing is associated with better cash utilization by foreign firms for investments. These improvements in investments and cash utilization are more pronounced for firms cross‐listed on US exchanges and for firms from countries with weak investor protection laws.     

How Representative Are Firms That Are Cross‐Listed in the United States? An Analysis of Accounting Quality

We provide evidence on the characteristics of local generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) earnings for firms cross‐listing on U.S. exchanges relative to a matched sample of foreign firms currently not cross‐listing in the United States to investigate whether U.S. listing is associated with differences in accounting data reported in local markets. We find that cross‐listed firms differ in terms of the time‐series properties of earnings and accruals, and the degree of association between accounting data and share prices. Cross‐listed firms appear to be less aggressive in terms of earnings management and report accounting data that are more conservative, take account of bad news in a more timely manner, and are more strongly associated with share price. Furthermore, the differences appear to result partially from changes around cross‐listing and partially from differences in accounting quality before listing. We do not observe a similar pattern for firms cross‐listed on other non‐U.S. exchanges or on the U.S. over‐the‐counter market, suggesting a unique quality to cross‐listing on U.S. exchanges.     

Individual investors’ attitudes towards listing requirements for foreign entities on U.S. stock exchanges and the promulgation of international accounting standards

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) currently requires foreign issuers of securities listed on U.S. securities exchanges to either employ U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) or include a statement of reconciliation to U.S. GAAP if they use their home country's accounting standards. With some exceptions, they are also required to comply with the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOA). John Thain, CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, states that these requirements hamper U.S. investments, economic growth, and employment opportunities. The Chairman of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), Sir David Tweedie, echoed Thain's comments. An important stakeholder who is affected significantly by the U.S. listing requirements is the U.S. individual investor. Accordingly this study examines their attitudes involving the extant rules for foreign listings on U.S. exchanges and other aspects of the issue. The study also examines their perceptions regarding accounting standard promulgation authority and the use of a global set of accounting principles. The results indicate that although U.S. investors are very much in favor of the listing of foreign companies on U.S. exchanges, they also endorse the current rule requiring either employment of U.S. GAAP or reconciliation to it as well as mandatory adherence to the SOA. In the area of accounting standards, although a large majority believed that the U.S. should control the accounting standards for U.S. listings, a smaller majority also believed that there should be a universal set of accounting principles for all stock exchanges.     

Regulation and Bonding: The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Flow of International Listings

In this paper, we examine the economic impact of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act (SOX) by analyzing foreign listing behavior onto U.S. and U.K. stock exchanges before and after the enactment of SOX in 2002. Using a sample of all listing events onto U.S. and U.K. exchanges from 1995–2006, we develop an exchange choice model that captures firm‐level, industry‐level, exchange‐level, and country‐level listing incentives, and test whether these listing preferences changed following the enactment of SOX. After controlling for firm characteristics and other economic determinants of these firms' exchange choice, we find that the listing preferences of large foreign firms choosing between U.S. exchanges and the London Stock Exchange's (LSE) Main Market did not change following the enactment of SOX. In contrast, we find that the likelihood of a U.S. listing among small foreign firms choosing between the NASDAQ and LSE's Alternative Investment Market decreased following the enactment of SOX. The negative effect among small firms is consistent with these marginal companies being less able to absorb the incremental costs associated with SOX compliance. The screening of smaller firms with weaker governance attributes from U.S. exchanges is consistent with the heightened governance costs imposed by SOX increasing the bonding‐related benefits of a U.S. listing.     

Listing regulations in China and their effect on the performance of IPOs and SOEs

China started to reform her state-owned enterprises (SOE) in 1990s. As a result of these reforms, some of the companies are partially privatized, while the others are fully privatized. The state kept certain profitable and strategically important SOEs under state control. This paper investigates the privatization progress, the listing requirements for those companies that are listed on two national stock exchanges and the performance of the privatized companies.     

How it all began: the rise of listing requirements on the London, Berlin, Paris, and New York stock exchanges

The issue of accounting standards for foreign securities listed on a stock exchange arose gradually over the period 1825-1914 among the leading exchanges in the first global financial market—London, New York, Paris, and Berlin. Comparing their listing requirements on the eve of World War I, we find that the London and New York exchanges were most detailed, reflecting their common-law legal environments and their status as self-regulating organizations. The evolution of listing requirements in London and New York therefore influenced the development of accounting standards in those countries. By contrast, Paris and Berlin relied on validation of a security by political authorities. One result of these differences in legal and political environments was that American railroads issued the only securities to be listed on each of the four exchanges.     

Choice of foreign listing location: Experience of Chinese firms

At the end of October 2003, there were 237 Chinese firms' listings on various stock exchanges outside of Mainland China. Beyond geographical proximity and other obvious explanations of why Chinese firms prefer listing in Hong Kong more than in the United States, we identify two additional benefits of a Hong Kong listing. We find that Chinese firms listed in Hong Kong have a better information environment than those listed solely in the United States. We also find that the Hong Kong-listed firms are less financially constrained, which may be due to their ability to access the Hong Kong capital market for external financing. The results of our study show that different stock markets offer different benefits as a listing venue and the benefits of foreign listing may depend on the choice of listing location.