Home About us Contact | |||
Firm Quality (firm + quality)
Selected AbstractsIPO Underpricing, Firm Quality, and Analyst ForecastsFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, Issue 2 2007Steven X. Zheng We find that IPO underpricing is positively related to post-IPO growth in sales and EBITDA, but is not significantly related to growth in earnings. Our evidence suggests that accrual reversals or earnings management may cause this inconsistency. We interpret the growth rates of sales and EBITDA as measures of firm quality, and conclude that our evidence supports the notion that IPO firms with greater underpricing are of better quality. Our tests on analysts' earnings forecast errors show that analysts are less positively biased in their earnings forecasts for IPO firms that have greater underpricing. [source] The Role of the Underlying Real Asset Market in REIT IPOsREAL ESTATE ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2005Jay 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] A Theory of Dividends Based on Tax ClientelesTHE JOURNAL OF FINANCE, Issue 6 2000Franklin Allen This paper explains why some firms prefer to pay dividends rather than repurchase shares. When institutional investors are relatively less taxed than individual investors, dividends induce "ownership clientele" effects. Firms paying dividends attract relatively more institutions, which have a relative advantage in detecting high firm quality and in ensuring firms are well managed. The theory is consistent with some documented regularities, specifically both the presence and stickiness of dividends, and offers novel empirical implications, e.g., a prediction that it is the tax difference between institutions and retail investors that determines dividend payments, not the absolute tax payments. [source] |