Seasoned Equity Offerings: Stock Market Liquidity and the Rights Offer Paradox

This paper examines the impact of market liquidity on seasoned equity offerings (SEO) characteristics in France. We find that, besides blockholders’ takeup, liquidity is an important determinant of SEO flotation method choice. We document higher direct equity offering flotation costs, but also improved stock market liquidity after public offerings and standby rights relative to uninsured rights. After controlling for endogeneity in the choice of SEO flotation method, we find that pure public offerings and standby rights are comparable in terms of direct costs and liquidity improvement. Our results provide new insights as to why firms choose public offerings despite apparently higher costs.     

Property Investment and Property Development Firm Performance Around Initial Public Offerings and Rights Offerings: U.K. Evidence

In contrast to the well-documented underperformance of equity issuers, property investment firms undertaking initial public offerings and rights issues have performed indistinguishably from similar nonissuing firms. Property development companies that issued equity over the same period performed significantly worse than nonissuing firms. The major difference between property development and property investment firms is that property investment firms hold portfolios of real estate assets and thus have more certain prices. The lower pricing uncertainty of property investment firms results in normal long-run performance. Tests of the cognitive bias hypothesis provide only weak support of this explanation, while size and book-market effects are unable to account for the performance of property investment and development companies. The findings of underperformance for rights issues suggest that timing equity issues to take advantage of new shareholders may not be linked to the existence of cognitive bias. An important finding for the international growth in securitized real estate markets is that no evidence is found suggesting equity issues of securitized real estate firms should be avoided.     

Seasoned Equity Issues in a Closely Held Market: Evidence from France

This paper examines seasoned equity offerings in France.Even though a rights offering is the primary flotation method, French companies are increasingly usingthe relatively expensive public offering method. We show that the market reaction to the announcementof seasoned equity issues is significantly negative for rights issues and insignificantly negative forpublic offerings. Our results suggest that the adverse selection effect is greater for rights issues thanfor public offerings, due to stronger underwriter certification for the public offerings. We find that theshare price effect is positively related to blockholders take-up renouncements for firms with priorconcentrated ownership. For these firms, the favourable ownership dispersion effect offsets the adverse selection effect.     

Motivations for public equity offers: An international perspective

This paper examines the motivations for public equity offers, using a sample of 17,226 initial public offerings and 13,142 seasoned equity offerings from 38 countries between 1990 and 2003. We estimate the uses of funds raised in both initial and seasoned offerings. Firms appear to spend incremental dollars on both R&D and capital expenditures, consistent with the investment financing explanation of equity issues. However, consistent with the mispricing explanation, high market to book firms tend to save more cash and offer a higher fraction of secondary shares in SEOs than low market to book firms.     

Seasoned Equity Issues in a Closely Held Market: Evidence from France

This paper examines seasoned equity offerings in France. Eventhough a rights offering is the primary flotation method, Frenchcompanies are increasingly using the relatively expensive publicoffering method. We show that the market reaction to the announcementof seasoned equity issues is significantly negative for rightsissues and insignificantly negative for public offerings. Ourresults suggest that the adverse selection effect is greaterfor rights issues than for public offerings, due to strongerunderwriter certification for the public offerings. We findthat the share price effect is positively related to blockholderstake-up renouncements for firms with prior concentrated ownership.For these firms, the favourable ownership dispersion effectoffsets the adverse selection effect. JEL Classification: G32,G14 and D80.     

Seasoned equity offerings and the short- and long-run performance of initial public offerings in the UK

In contrast to the US practice, rights issues is the predominant method of raising additional equity capital in the London market. the UK evidence for the period 1980-1991 provides no support to the hypothesis that IPO firms deliberately underprice to signal their quality and facilitate subsequent seasoned equity offerings. the level of initial returns is related neither to the size of the issue nor to the price response at the announcement of a rights issue. the results demonstrate, however, that firms with higher first day returns are quicker in returning to the market for additional equity capital. There is also strong evidence to suggest that the announcement of a seasoned equity offering follows a period of significant rises in the stock prices of reissuing firms. Such gains are, however, dissipated quickly in the 18 months after the announcement of the seasoned equity offering. the level of underperformance is particularly pronounced for firms that raised relatively small subsequent amounts of capital in relation to funds raised at the initial offering. Thus, the paper documents a pattern of post-issue behaviour which is fundamentally similar for both unseasoned and seasoned equity offerings.     

The choice between rights and underwritten equity offerings: Evidence from Chinese stock markets

We study the choice and valuation effects of alternative flotation methods using a sample of Chinese firms that must meet the return on equity (ROE) thresholds set by the government to raise equity capital. The ROE requirement, although changed over time, seems to play an important role on the valuation and performance of seasoned equity offerings. The analysis of 219 rights and 75 underwritten offerings between 2000 and 2004 shows that Chinese firms that are not qualified for the flotation method with a higher ROE requirement suffer the most at announcement and experience significantly lower buy-and-hold abnormal returns than those that are qualified. Our results suggest that the freedom to choose their preferred flotation method may be valuable to firms that meet the higher ROE requirement. Finally, our probit models identify several determinants of the choice of flotation methods.     

The information content of insider trading around seasoned equity offerings

This paper examines insider trading around seasoned equity offering (SEO) announcements in Hong Kong. The announcements of private placings (rights offerings) are associated with positive (negative) abnormal stock returns. However, longer-term stock returns are negative for both private placings and rights offerings. In general, insiders are net purchasers in placing firms in the 6 months prior to and 6 months subsequent to the SEO, whereas insiders are net sellers in rights issue firms in the 6 months prior to and 6 months subsequent to the issue. The net purchases made by the insiders of firms making placements help them maintain their control rights, which are otherwise diluted by the placements. Insider trading does not explain longer-term investment returns.     

Unit initial public offerings: Staged equity or signaling mechanism?

We investigate the use of unit (i.e., package) initial public offerings by Australian industrial firms and conclude that their use reflects their role as a signaling mechanism (Chemmanur and Fulghieri, 1997), as distinct from the agency–cost explanation offered by Schultz (1993). From a sample of 394 IPOs between 1976 and 1994, the 66 firms making unit offerings are typically riskier, use less prestigious underwriters and have a lower level of retained ownership than other IPO firms. While these results are also consistent with Schultz's agency cost explanation, other results we report are not. We find no difference in underpricing etween unit IPOs and other IPO firms, nor are there any significant differences in the planned uses of proceeds reported in the prospectus, post–listing failure rates or secondary equity offerings of the type predicted by Schultz. We do however, report evidence consistent with a prediction unique to the signaling explanation. After controlling for the level of ownership retained by insiders, the proportion of firm value sold as warrants is increasing in IPO firms' riskiness.     

An analysis of the share price and accounting performance of rights offerings in China

This study examines both the short- and long-term share price and accounting performance of Chinese rights issues. Employing data from 432 rights offerings issued between 1994 and 1999, the study documents a statistically significant positive abnormal stock return of 4.8% on the ex-date. Over the long run, rights issuing firms significantly outperform control portfolios of firms matched on the basis of size, the book-to-market ratio, and both size and the book-to-market ratio. Similar to the case of U.S. experience, investors in China appear to underreact to the initial announcements of new equity offerings, but in the opposite direction. Interestingly, although firms issuing rights generally underperform their non-issuing peers in important operating performance metrics such as return on assets, their growth rates of sales and capital expenditures far outstrip non-issuers. Finally, the findings document that changes in the long-term stock performance of rights issuing firms are positively correlated with changes in post issue accounting performance.     

Why do firms issue private equity repeatedly? On the motives and information content of multiple PIPE offerings

This study examines why private equity issues tend to be a repeated source of financing for public firms. We test the recent operational needs theory of public equity issuance within the context of repeated private equity issues. We find that repeated PIPE issuers burn through cash quickly and do not reach the standards of information transparency or profitability needed for a successful public equity offering. This has implications for investor composition and the market response to a PIPE. Initial PIPE offerings are characterized by substantial diversity in investor type. In successive transactions firms increasingly rely upon hedge funds, who extract greater price discounts and more often require cash flow rights as opposed to control rights. As firms select a path of repeated PIPEs to raise funds, successive issues become uninformative to the market. We conclude that, for small public firms, the same motive underlies public equity offerings and repeated private equity offerings—an acute need for cash.     

The revival of shelf-registered corporate equity offerings

We report that traditional seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) are no longer firms' preferred choice for raising seasoned public equity. Traditional offerings have recently been surpassed by shelf-registered offerings in terms of both annual frequency and total capital raised. This represents a dramatic shift from the 1980s, during which the overwhelming majority of firms favored traditional over shelf-registered offerings. We find that the growth in shelf use is related to firms increasingly valuing and using the option feature of shelf registration to defer offerings. Moreover, the evidence indicates that the way firms now use shelf offerings resolves the shelf under-certification problem and results in no larger market penalties and significantly lower underwriter fees relative to non-shelf offerings. Finally, firms often use universal shelf filings and choose between debt and equity offerings based on the prevailing relative market conditions.     

The demise of the rights issue

This article suggests that the lack of use of rights offeringsin the United States, a phenomenon referred to as the equityunderwriting paradox, can be explained by transaction-cost conditions.A sample of underwritten rights offerings provides support forthe explanation. Firms making underwritten rights offeringspaid lower underwriter fees but incurred significantly largerprice drops just prior to the offering than did firms makingunderwritten public offerings. Further analysis reveals thatthe underwritten-rights-offering price concessions are a formof transaction cost that is not found in under-written publicofferings.     

Stock offerings in a different institutional setting: The Swiss case, 1973–1983

This paper analyzes the stock price effect of equity issues in Switzerland. There, insiders are not legally prevented from using their information for personal trades, and security offerings are with almost no exception rights issues. Unlike what we find for a comprehensive sample of U.S. rights issues and a sample of U.S. general cash offerings, a significant majority of firms experiences a positive monthly announcement effect. The average abnormal return itself, however, is not significant. Also, we find evidence inconsistent with infinitely price-elastic demand functions for common stock, as well as some evidence that offer prices convey new information.     

Private equity exits after IPOs

We examine post-IPO exits of private equity sponsors of portfolio firms via follow-on secondary equity offerings and third party takeovers. Sponsors retain considerable ownership in listed portfolio firms for lengthy periods after IPOs, well beyond lockup expiration. After private equity post-IPO secondary offerings, corporate profitability is strongly superior to benchmark firms, indicating portfolio firms are successfully prepared for private equity's subsequent exit. Nevertheless, share prices fall at offering announcements, reflecting the failure of private equity sponsors to exit stakes in listed entities at the high premiums paid in third party takeovers, premiums that are invariably shared equally with public shareholders.     

Institutional Shareholder Investment Horizons and Seasoned Equity Offerings

Firms with more short‐term institutional shareholders experience significantly more negative abnormal returns at the announcement of seasoned equity offerings. This effect is strong for primary offerings (only firms receive proceeds), but is not present for secondary offerings (firms do not receive any proceeds). Furthermore, a shorter institutional shareholder investment horizon predicts poorer postissue abnormal operating performance and the negative effect of a shorter shareholder horizon is mitigated by higher managerial ownership. My results are consistent with the argument that long‐term shareholders more carefully monitor managerial activities and prevent misuse of the cash flow provided by equity issues.