Search results

During the height of the financial/credit crisis of 2008, the US Internal Revenue Service issued temporary guidance that permits REITs (real estate investment trusts) to retain cash and pay “effective stock dividends” through 2009 to meet their income distribution requirement. The purpose of this study is to investigate the policy implications of this guidance on shareholders' wealth and the intra‐industry effects for non‐event, rival REITs when event REITs announced elective stock dividends.

This study identified the announcements of the Revenue Procedures 2008‐68 and 2009‐15 and subsequent six equity REITs announcing the distribution of effective stock dividends in the first quarter of 2009. To assess their implications, this study adopted the event study methodology and multivariate regressions to examine the REIT price reactions and their distribution to the Revenue Procedure announcements and to the elective stock dividend announcements, respectively.

The Revenue Procedure announcements have positive wealth effects on the entire REIT market and REITs with higher leverage enjoy larger abnormal returns. During firm stock dividend announcement windows, non‐event, rival REITs have higher positive price reactions when the event firm and the non‐event firm are not alike and their returns have a low correlation coefficient, when the event firm has a large negative abnormal price reaction, and when the event firm pays cash/stock dividends in the mixture of 40 percent:60 percent, instead of 10 percent:90percent.

The results will help REIT investors to make better decisions. This study produces important implications for investors to pick REITs which are likely to experience higher returns at periods of turmoil when announcements about dividend policy changes are expected.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study looking into intra‐industry effects of REIT dividend announcements and the policy implications of the elective REIT stock dividends permitted by the US Internal Revenue Service. The results of this study show that the informational signals associated with these announcement events are rich and have intra‐industry implications on REIT share prices.

The purpose of this paper is to examine market reactions to private equity placements and intra-industry information spillover effects in the Taiwan Stock Exchange.

The authors first use the market model to compute the abnormal announcement returns. To examine the joint impact of the private investment in public equity (PIPE) purposes and the lead investor industry, the authors regress the issuers’ cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) on the dummy variables of PIPE purposes and the lead investor industry. To study the spillover effects, the authors regress the rivals’ CARs on the issuers’ CARs, PIPE purposes, and the lead investor industry. Finally, the industry Herfindahl index is used as a proxy for the market power of issuers and rivals to examine its impact on the spillover effects.

The authors find that issuing firms experience positive abnormal returns during the announcement period. Issuers enjoy more positive market reactions when the proceeds of offerings are primarily used to establish a long-term strategic alliance or to integrate business and when the lead investor is in the same industry. Furthermore, the authors show that the contagion effect dominates the competitive effect in private equity placements at the aggregate level. At the subsample level, the authors find competitive effect overpowers contagion effect when the purpose of offerings is primarily used to establish a long-term strategic alliance or to integrate business and when the lead investor is in the different industry. Finally, the authors show that rivals with relative lower market power enjoy more positive contagion effects.

First, the analysis documents the simultaneous importance of both the purposes of private offerings and the lead investor’s industry on announcement reactions, which shed new light on the positive abnormal returns during the announcement period. Second, the study adds to the literature on the information spillover effects by analyzing the role played by purposes of offerings and rivals’ market power. This paper provides a more complete picture of the offsetting competitive and contagion effects.

We investigate global competitors’ reaction to the Citicorp–Travelers mega merger announcement and find that global competitors, especially banks in Europe and the US, reacted positively to the Citicorp and Travelers’ merger announcement. The uncertainties created by the investigations into the merger proposal had significant impact on the competitors’ stock price. The announcement that the merger had been consummated also elicited a significantly positive reaction from the rivals following the resolution of uncertainties emanating from the regulatory challenges. The positive reaction by competitors suggests that the merger was a wealth-creating event for the large firms in the financial services industry. The expected benefits outweighed any competitive effects resulting from the merger. The competitors’ reaction was, however, not homogenous. Our cross-sectional analysis shows that the abnormal returns earned by the competitors were higher the larger the competitor. In addition, the abnormal returns were greater for the US rivals. That the global competitors reacted positively to the Citicorp–Travelers mega merger announcement is consistent with our assertion that the merger had ramifications that go beyond regulatory concerns in the US.

This paper aims to analyze the effects on shareholder value caused by the announcement of seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) by real estate firms from 12 European countries.

A 4-factor model event study is conducted to assess the impact of SEO announcements on firm value. Additionally, a cross-sectional regression is run to identify factors that aggravate or mitigate the documented announcement effects.

Significant wealth losses of −1 per cent are found on the announcement day of an SEO. However, firms with good corporate governance and a low probability of overinvesting experience less negative announcement effects.

The present study considers equity financing. In this context, investors seem to thoroughly assess the implications of capital increases by looking at quality indicators. For firms with good corporate governance, management incentivizing mechanisms and a lower probability of overinvesting, shareholders’ trust in the management mitigates the bad signal that the announcement of an SEO usually conveys.

The finding of corporate governance as a value enhancing factor in the context of equity offerings, even during periods of financial turmoil, is reassuring to both managers and regulators.

Using data from a retail chain of 193 bakery shops that underwent downsizing, we study the effects of two types of downsizing announcements – closure or sale to another operator – on sales in the affected shops, and how these effects are moderated by job security perceptions. On average, sales in the affected shops go down by 26% after a closure announcement and by 7% after a sale announcement. Sales decline more sharply in shops where employees had higher job security perceptions before the announcement. Our findings are consistent with psychological contract theory: a breach of an implicit contract promising job security in exchange for work effort results in a reciprocal effort withdrawal. We rule out several alternative explanations to our findings.

This analysis is the first to explore the overall roles of the offsetting attraction and distraction influences of earnings news in shaping the level of attention given to the equity market by market participants.

We use multivariate regression approach and examine how trading activity levels within the set of non-announcing firms varies with respect to collective measures of contemporaneous earnings announcement visibility. We employ attention and information transfer theories in our hypothesis development.

This analysis is the first to explore the overall roles of the offsetting attraction and distraction influences of earnings news in shaping the level of attention given to the equity market by market participants. Specifically, we examine how the number of earnings announcement activity affects investor attention as measured by trading volume given to the set of non-announcing firms. We find that while earnings announcement numbers lower trading volume responses to earnings news among announcing firms (consistent with Hirshleifer et al., 2009), their distractive influence does not carry over into the market as a whole. More importantly, investor attention to both the overall market and the larger subset of non-announcing firms increase in response to earnings news activity levels. However, after decomposing the announcers as same-industry and different-industry announcers, we find that investor attention to the non-announcing segment of the market increases with the number of same-industry announcers, but actually seems to decrease (i.e. they distract attention) with the number of different-industry announcers. We also find that the associated earnings surprise brings attention to non-announcing firms (consistent with earnings news is relevant to overall market price movements). Finally, we find that distraction effects are attenuated in the financial crisis period.

A promising area of future research is to examine the relation between market pricing efficiency and aggregate earnings activity for the set of non-announcing firms. Although it will be a challenging task to measure pricing efficiency for the non-announcers, this will complement the prior literature only focusing on the announcing segment of the market.

First, instead of assessing the impact of number of earnings announcements on the subset of announcing firms, which is a micro-level perspective, we identify the impact of news arrivals on all firms in the market including the vastly larger set of non-announcing firms. Second, by decomposing the number of announcements into industry-related and -unrelated news we show that different types of news arrivals spark investor attention differently, suggesting the importance of categorizing the news into related and unrelated industries.

A potential future area of research identified by our analysis is to investigate what type of investors' attention is distracted or attracted during the earnings announcements. A promising area of future research is to examine the relation between market pricing efficiency and aggregate earnings activity for the set of non-announcing firms.

This paper is the first one exploring the overall roles of the offsetting attraction and distraction influences of earnings announcements in shaping the level of investor attention given to the equity market by market participants. Our findings should be of interest to investors, analysts, security market regulators and researchers.

Given the public availability of secondary data on investments in events such as the Olympics, FIFA World Cup and professional sports, event studies that measure stock market response to these investments have grown. Previous findings are mixed, however, with some studies suggesting that the announcement of sponsorship contracts is a positive event and others finding detrimental effects of the announcement on shareholder value. This study aims to analyze the mixed findings from event studies in sport sponsorship to determine if sponsorship announcements influence stock market response.

The meta-analysis examines more than 20 years of research on event studies in sponsorship (34 studies).

The overall results show a positive, but non-significant effect of partnership deal announcements on shareholder wealth. Further analysis considers the effects of sponsorship announcements by each type of event window to see the impact of the announcement relative to time (pre-announcement, announcement day, post-announcement and pre- to post-announcement). This closer examination of the event window shows that stock prices of sponsoring organizations increased in the pre-announcement window.

Quantitative meta-analytic findings indicate that information about sponsorship deals appears to leak to share markets and positively influence share price. This finding suggests that sponsoring the sports and events found in these event studies is seen as value enhancing for sponsoring firms.

Research on mergers has made considerable progress over the last 50 years and has produced a vast body of literature, especially in the developed markets of the world. Little is known about the effect of announcements of mergers on shareholder wealth in the Indian context. Also unknown is the apparent influence of the market for corporate control on such wealth effects. The purpose of this paper is to fill gaps in this knowledge.

The study uses a standard event study method and statistically analyses share price and other secondary data.

It was found that the acquired firm shareholders enjoy significant wealth gains of 11.6 per cent in a 21‐day event window period, whereas the acquiring and combined firm shareholders do not do so. Mergers that do not see transfer of corporate control bestow significant wealth gains of 21.1 per cent on announcement on the target firm shareholders, whereas those where such a transfer takes place do not witness such gains.

One of the limitations of the study is the period. This study, a part of research covering a larger gamut of issues, necessitated the restriction of the time to the seven‐year 1996‐2002 timeline. The sample size of 34 usable, finally merged pairs of firms may appear limited, though several studies of this genre have used smaller sample sizes. However, the findings obtained are of value. The study points towards further research using a longer period that might help one to understand longitudinal variations in merger announcement effects on shareholder wealth. It also encourages future studies on several other factors which influence such effects.

The redistribution of shareholder wealth on merger announcement in India seems to be following a pattern similar to that found in many other studies, though the quantum of gains to the target shareholders is larger. Managers may also have to factor‐in the impact of the transfer of corporate control from the acquired to the acquiring firm on their assessment of shareholder wealth effects before announcing mergers.

The paper simultaneously adds to knowledge about wealth effects on merger announcement and the influence of the market for corporate control on this effect, in the Indian context.

The wealth effect of accelerated stock repurchase (ASR) documented by previous studies is not as large as the authors would have expected. The authors believe that there are potentially important sampling problems in the previous studies, which make the results less reliable. Identifying a number of factors that can possibly affect the announcement-period returns, the purpose of this paper is to reexamine the wealth effect of ASRs.

The paper identifies a number of factors that can possibly affect the announcement-period returns to ASRs which include: whether an ASR announcement in the press is the initiation date or the completion date of the ASR; the size of the ASR program; whether an ASR is part of an open market repurchase (OMR) program; the frequency of ASR announcements by a firm; whether other corporate news is announced simultaneously with an ASR. The paper partitions the ASR sample into three groups, and then examines the wealth effect of these groups.

The empirical results show that the market reacts differently to the announcement of ASR in these three groups. The three-day announcement-period CAR (t=−1, +1) is 3.59 percent for the high-wealth-effect group, 2.01 percent for the medium-wealth-effect group, and 1.48 percent for the low-wealth-effect group. The paper also identifies the size of the ASR program, whether the ASR is announced simultaneously with an OMR or not, and the frequency of ASR announcements are the most important determinants of the announcement-period abnormal returns.

These findings suggest that the weaker wealth effects of ASRs that have been documented in previous studies are due to sampling related issues.

This paper aims to examine whether the release of news about policy interventions by the troika [European Union (EU)/the European Central Bank (ECB)/International Monetary Fund (IMF)] in the crisis-affected EU countries (Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain) and whether the policy responses of these countries’ governments had impacts on the return and risk of stocks in the financial and real-economy sectors of these countries.

The paper uses a broad set of news announcements concerning the troika authorities’ policy interventions and the policy responses of the affected Eurozone states’ governments. To test for the risk and return effects of these announcements during the crisis period, a set of regression equations is estimated under a difference-in-difference approach using intercept and slope dummy variables for news releases from troika authorities and from the national governments of the six EU countries. This enables unraveling the effects of the crisis (first difference) and the effects of news announcements (second difference).

The results indicate that the involvement of the troika managed to reverse some of the unfavourable market effects of the crisis. Moreover, the policy response of national governments was found to have stronger favourable effects in the markets of the affected countries implying that investors likely waited for the response of the national governments before they reacted to the policy actions of the troika. The simultaneous release of news from the troika and from national governments had adverse effects on the returns and risk of the firms in the real economy sectors, suggesting that cross-news announcements conveyed negative information in the markets.

The paper provides evidence on the effects of policy-related news announcements on the development of the recent sovereign debt crisis in Europe. This issue is highly important, as it can reveal the effectiveness of the IMF’s and EU authorities’ policy interventions in affected Eurozone member states during the first major crisis in Europe since the monetary union.