Home  About us  Contact
 

Cost Explanation (cost + explanation)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting100%

Selected Abstracts

Unit initial public offerings: Staged equity or signaling mechanism?

ACCOUNTING & FINANCE, Issue 1 2003
Martin Lee
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. [source]

Structuring residual income and decision rights under internal governance: results from the Hungarian trucking industry

MANAGERIAL AND DECISION ECONOMICS, Issue 5 2005
Josef Windsperger
The paper offers a property rights and monitoring cost explanation for the allocation of residual income and decision rights between the carriers and truck drivers under internal governance. First, by applying the property rights theory, we argue that the structure of residual income rights depends on the importance of noncontractible (intangible) assets of the truck driver to generate residual surplus. The more important the truck driver's intangible knowledge assets, the more residual income rights should be transferred to him. Second, we controlled for the monitoring costs as an additional explanatory variable of the allocation of residual income rights. According to agency theory, the variable proportion of the driver's income should be higher where monitoring costs are higher. Third, we investigate the relationship between residual income and residual decision rights under internal governance. If the contractual relation is governed by an employment contract, residual decision and residual income rights may be substitutes because, under fiat, a certain incentive effect of the governance structure may result either from the allocation of high-powered incentives or the transfer of residual decision rights to the driver. These hypotheses were tested by using data from the Hungarian trucking industry. The data provide partial support for the hypotheses. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Nonprofits as Local Government Service Contractors

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, Issue 4 2009
Richard C. Feiock
Despite the growing role that contracts with nonprofits play in local service delivery, only limited attention has been directed to why some cities rely more on nonprofit organizations to produce services or how political institutions influence the role nonprofits play in service delivery. To investigate these issues, the authors present a transaction cost explanation that focuses on how political system characteristics and structures of service markets shape the costs of negotiating, monitoring, and enforcing contracts for local governments. The findings indicate that forms of government, mayoral turnover, racial segregation, and the market of nonprofit producers influence the role of nonprofits in delivering elder services, but decisions to contract exclusively with nonprofits are subject to different influences than decisions to jointly produce service with a nonprofit organization. [source]

An Analysis of Nonunderwritten Rights Offers: The Case of Closed-END Funds

THE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL RESEARCH, Issue 2 2002
James A. Miles
Abstract We study nonunderwritten rights offerings without subscription pre-commitments from large shareholders. The results indicate firms incur substantial indirect costs in the form of price concessions for raising equity capital this way. The data therefore support the selling cost explanation of the rights-offering paradox. Additionally, we describe how market participants collectively respond to intermediate such offerings. [source]