Competition and cooperation among exchanges: A theory of cross-listing and endogenous listing standards

We analyze firms’ choice of exchange to list equity and exchanges’ choice of listing standards when insiders have private information about firm value, but outsiders can produce (noisy) information at a cost. Exchanges are populated by two kinds of investors, whose numbers vary across exchanges: sophisticated (low information production cost) investors and ordinary (high–cost) investors. While firms are short-lived, exchanges are long-lived, value-maximizing agents whose listing and disclosure standards evolve over time. The listing standards chosen by exchanges affect their “reputation,” since outsiders can partially infer the rigor of these standards from the post-listing performance of firms. We show that, while exchanges use their listing standards as a tool in competing for listings with other exchanges, this will not necessarily lead to a “race to the bottom” in listing standards. Further, a merger between two exchanges may result in a higher listing standard for the combined exchange relative to that of either of the merging exchanges. We develop several other implications for firms’ listing choices and resulting valuation effects, the impact of competition and co-operation among exchanges on listing standards, and the optimal regulation of exchanges.     

What Drives the Issuance of Putable Convertibles: Risk-Shifting,Asymmetric Information,or Taxes?

This paper presents the first empirical analysis of firms’ rationale for issuing putable convertible bonds in the literature. We distinguish between three possible rationales for the issuance of putable convertibles: 1) the risk-shifting hypothesis, 2) the asymmetric information hypothesis, and 3) the tax savings hypothesis. The results of our empirical analysis can be summarized as follows. First, putable convertible issuers are larger, less risky firms, having larger cash flows, smaller growth opportunities, and lower bankruptcy probabilities as compared to ordinary convertible issuers. Second, putable convertible issuers have lower preissue market valuations, more favorable announcement effects, and better postissue operating performance when compared to ordinary convertible issuers. Third, putable convertible issuers have better postissue long-run stock return performance as compared to ordinary convertible issuers. Finally, putable convertible issuers typically have greater tax obligations and better credit ratings than ordinary convertible issuers. Overall, the results of our univariate as well as multivariate analyses provide support for the asymmetric information and tax savings hypotheses, but little support for the risk-shifting hypothesis.     

WHY ISSUE TRACKING STOCK? INSIGHTS FROM A COMPARISON WITH SPIN‐OFFS AND CARVE‐OUTS

In recent years, tracking stocks, which amount to a new form of corporate restructuring, have been gaining in popularity. In 1999 alone, 17 companies announced new tracking stock issues, and by February 2000 there were 40 tracking stocks trading in the U.S. equity markets. Why have tracking stocks become so popular in recent years? In this article, the authors present new evidence on the effectiveness of tracking stock issues in creating shareholder value as compared to the record of two other closely related forms of corporate restructuring—spin‐offs and equity carve‐outs. The authors find that the parents and subsidiaries of tracking‐stock firms are more “related” than those that undertake the other two forms of corporate restructuring, that there is a positive announcement effect (similar in size to that of spin‐offs but greater than that of equity carve‐outs) on stock prices, and that the number of analysts following the firm increases following the issuance of tracking stock. These findings are interpreted as suggesting that the main corporate motives for issuing tracking stock are the valuation benefits from providing investors with more information about the newly listed subsidiary, while at the same time preserving the existing synergies between the business units involved. This maintenance of existing synergies, however, appears to have come at a significant price. Under the tracking stock structure, there seem to be no benefits attributable, as in the case of spin‐offs, to improvements in corporate governance. While spinoffs significantly increase the probability that the parents or subsidiaries will later be taken over (with its disciplining effect on management), there is no such increase in takeover probability for firms issuing tracking stock. Consistent with this difference, the authors find that the market‐adjusted two‐year holding period return for tracking stock parents and subsidiaries is significantly lower than the corresponding return for spinoffs and their corporate parents.     

Dual class IPOs: A theoretical analysis

We consider an incumbent who wishes to sell equity to outsiders at an IPO to implement his firm’s project. He may be talented (lower cost of effort, comparative advantage in project-implementation) or untalented. The project may have high (intrinsically more valuable, but showing less signs of success in the near-term) or low near-term uncertainty. Under a single class share structure, the incumbent has a greater chance of losing control to potential rivals if he undertakes the project with high near-term uncertainty, since outsiders may vote for the rival if they believe the project is not progressing well. A dual class share structure allows the incumbent to have enough votes to prevail against any rival, but may be misused by untalented incumbents to dissipate value. Our results help to explain firms’ choices between dual class and single class IPOs and the post-IPO operating performance of dual class versus single class firms.     

Antitakeover provisions in corporate spin-offs

We analyze the relation between antitakeover provisions (ATPs) and the performance of spin-off firms. We find that firms protected by more ATPs before spin-offs have higher abnormal announcement returns and greater improvements in post-spin-off operating performance than firms with fewer ATPs. Further, firms that reduce the number of ATPs after spin-offs have greater improvements in operating performance than firms that do not reduce the number of ATPs. Finally, CEOs of pre-spin-off firms tend to retain more ATPs in parent firms and assign fewer ATPs to the spun-off units if they remain as the CEOs of the parents but not the spun-off units. Overall, our results indicate a positive relation between ATPs and the value gains to spin-offs.     

A theory of contractual provisions in leasing

We develop a non-tax rationale for leasing in a double-sided asymmetric information setting, and analyze how various contractual provisions in leasing contracts arise in equilibrium. In our model, a manufacturer of capital goods has private information about their quality; entrepreneurs (users of these capital goods) come to learn this quality only by using them over a period of time. Each unit of the capital goods requires a certain level of maintenance in each period. Entrepreneurs differ in their cost of providing this maintenance; this maintenance cost is information private to each entrepreneur. Leasing emerges as an equilibrium solution to this double-sided asymmetric information problem. Various contractual provisions in leasing contracts (e.g., short-term versus long-term leases with non-cancellation provisions, option to buy at lease termination, and service leases) also emerge as equilibrium solutions under alternative settings. Leases with metering provisions emerge in equilibrium when, in addition to the maintenance cost, entrepreneurs differ in other dimensions, such as their intensity of usage of the capital good. Our model has implications for the lease-versus-sell decision, the situations under which various leasing contract provisions will be used, and for the relative magnitudes of sales prices and leasing costs (for leases with different contractual provisions).     

A theory of the going-public decision

We address the question: At what stage in its life should afirm go public rather than undertake its projects using privateequity financing? In our model a firm may raise external financingeither by placing shares privately with a risk-averse venturecapitalist or by selling shares in an IPO to numerous smallinvestors. The entrepreneur has private information about hisfirm's value, but outsiders can reduce this informational disadvantageby evaluating the firm at a cost. The equilibrium timing ofthe going-public decision is determined by the firm's trade-offbetween minimizing the duplication in information productionby outsiders (unavoidable in the IPO market, but mitigated bya publicly observable share price) and avoiding the risk-premiumdemanded by venture capitalists. Testable implications are developedfor the cross-sectional variations in the age of going-publicacross industries and countries.     

Is dividend smoothing universal?: New insights from a comparative study of dividend policies in Hong Kong and the U.S.

In this paper, we develop new insights about the dynamics of corporate dividend policy by performing the natural experiment of comparing corporate dividend policies in Hong Kong and the U.S., two economies where the tax regime and equity ownership structure are significantly different. Our empirical results can be summarized as follows. First, a test of the Lintner model reveals that the extent of dividend smoothing by firms in Hong Kong is significantly less than those in the U.S. Second, the signaling effects of dividend changes on stock returns are stronger in the U.S. compared to those in Hong Kong. Third, our logit analysis of the determinants of dividend changes indicates that, while the lagged dividend yield significantly affects dividend changes in both countries in the same fashion, prior year stock returns have opposite effects on dividend changes in the two countries. Finally, the extent of dividend smoothing is not systematically related to blockholder equity ownership in either country. Overall, our results suggest that, compared to U.S. firms, Hong Kong firms pursue a more flexible dividend policy commensurate with earnings, and that the differences between the dividend policies of firms in the two countries are consistent with the signaling implications of the differences in the tax regime across the two countries.     

Institutional trading, information production, and the choice between spin-offs, carve-outs, and tracking stock issues

We analyze a firm's choice between spin-offs, equity carve-outs, and tracking stock issues and the role of institutional investors in corporate restructuring. We model a firm with two divisions. Insiders have private information about firm value and face an equity market with retail and institutional investors. We show that restructuring increases information production by institutional investors (relative to that about the consolidated firm): the highest increase in information production arises from spin-offs, the next highest from carve-outs, and the lowest from tracking stock issues. Insiders with the most favorable private information implement spin-offs; those with less favorable private information implement carve-outs; those with even less favorable private information implement tracking stock issues; and those with unfavorable private information remain consolidated. We explain the positive announcement effect and increase in analyst coverage associated with all three forms of restructuring. Our model also generates a number of novel testable predictions for firms' choice between spin-offs, carve-outs, and tracking stock issues, and for institutional trading around these three forms of restructuring.