			Home About us Contact

IPO Market (ipo + market)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	100%

Selected Abstracts

Differences between European and American IPO Markets

EUROPEAN FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, Issue 4 2003
Jay R. Ritter
G24; G32; G14; G15 Abstract This brief survey discusses recent developments in the European initial public offering (IPO) market. The spectacular rise and fall of the Euro NM markets and the growth of bookbuilding as a procedure for pricing and allocating IPOs are two important patterns. Gross spreads are lower and less clustered than in the USA. Unlike the USA, some European IPOs, especially those in Germany, have when-issued trading prior to the final setting of the offer price. Current research includes empirical studies on the valuation of IPOs and both theoretical and empirical work on the determinants of short-run underpricing. [source]

The Short, and Long,run Performance of New Listings in Tunisia

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCE, Issue 4 2001
Samy Ben Naceur
This study examines abnormal stock market returns of new listings on the Tunisian Stock Exchange. Substantial positive abnormal returns are found on the first listing day and this finding is similar to that obtained in other countries. Subsequent performance is poor and investors who bought shares at the close of trading on the first day would have lost about 22% against the Tunis Stock Exchange index over a three,year period. The possible causes of this are investigated. Among the factors found in the literature that possibly affect the level of long,term performance, only the state of the IPO market, the initial return, the delay in reaching the ,first market price' and the size of the firms have significant coefficients. This result is supportive of the traditional fad's interpretation of long,term underperformance. [source]

The Role of the Underlying Real Asset Market in REIT IPOs

REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2005
Jay C. Hartzell
A leading explanation for IPO cycles is time-varying supply and demand for the underlying assets of the firms that are considering going public. We test this hypothesis using REIT IPOs, taking advantage of the relative transparency of the underlying real asset markets. We document links between REIT IPO activity and both the conditions of the underlying real estate market and the price of REITs. We find no significant relation between the heat of the IPO market and post-IPO operating performance, implying homogeneous firm quality across IPO cycles. Finally, we show that lagged IPO proceeds are related to future increases in investment and in capacity utilization. [source]

Morgan Stanley Roundtable on Private Equity and Its Import for Public Companies

JOURNAL OF APPLIED CORPORATE FINANCE, Issue 3 2006
Article first published online: 4 OCT 200
The role of private equity in global capital markets appears to be expanding at an extraordinary rate. Morgan Stanley estimates that there are now some 2,700 private equity funds that either have raised, or are in the process of raising, a total of $500 billion. With this abundance of available equity capital, the willingness of private equity firms to participate in "club" deals, and the leverage that can be put on top of the equity, private equity buyers now appear able and willing to pay higher prices for assets than ever before. And thanks in part to this new purchasing power, private equity transactions reportedly account for a quarter of all global M&A activity as well as a third of the high yield and IPO markets. The stock of capital now devoted to private equity reflects the demonstrated ability of at least the most reputable buyout firms to produce consistently high rates of returns for their limited partners. Although a talent for identifying and purchasing undervalued assets may be part of the story, the ability to produce such returns on a consistent basis implies an ability to add value, to improve the performance of the operating companies they invest in and control. And in this round-table, a small group of academics and practitioners address two main questions: How does private equity add value? And are there lessons for public companies in the success of private companies? According to the panelists, the answer to the first question appears to have changed somewhat over time. The consensus was that most of the value added by the LBO firms of the,80s was created during the initial structuring of the deals, a process described by Steve Kaplan as "financial and governance engineering," which includes not only aggressive use of leverage and powerful equity incentives for operating managements, but active oversight by a small, intensely interested board of directors. In the past ten years, however, these standard LBO features have been complemented by increased attention to "operational engineering," to the point where today's buyout firms feel obligated, like classic venture capitalists, to acquire and tout their own operating expertise. In response to the second of the two questions, Michael Jensen argues that much of the approach and benefits of private equity-particularly the adjustments of financial policies and stronger managerial incentives-can be replicated by public companies. And although some of these benefits have already been realized, much more remains to be done. Perhaps the biggest challenge, however, is finding a way to transfer to public companies the board-level expertise, incentives, and degree of engagement that characterize companies run by private equity investors. [source]