Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the common stock price reaction and the changes to the risk exposure of the cross-listing for real estate investment trusts (REITs).

The paper adopts the event study methodology to assess the abnormal returns (ARs). Pre- and post-cross-listing changes in the risk exposure for the domestic and foreign markets are examined, via a modified two-factor international asset pricing model. A comparison is made for two broad cross-listings, namely, the depositary receipts and the dual ordinary listings, to examine the impacts from institutional differences.

Cross-listed REITs generally experience positive and significant ARs throughout the event window, implying significant superior returns associated with the cross-listing for REITs. On systematic risks, REITs exhibit significant decline in their domestic market β coefficients after the cross-listing. However, the foreign market β coefficients do not yield conclusive evidence when compared across the sample.

Results are consistent with prudential asset allocation for potential diversification gains from the cross-listing, as the reduction from the domestic market beta is more significant than changes in the foreign market beta.

The results and findings should incentivise REIT managers to explore viable cross-listing.

Such cross-listing for REITs should enhance risk diversification.

This is a pioneer study on cross-listing of REITs. It provides a basis for investment decision making, and could provoke further research and discussion.

In this paper, the authors aim to test the assertion that options act as a substitute for short sales by allowing investors an alternative way to act on bearish sentiment. An empirical test of this assertion requires a researcher to observe both types of firm – those that weren’t short sale constrained, as well as those that were. The authors examine the ability of options to alleviate the short sales constraint directly – in an environment where the constraint is likely to differ across firms in a systematic fashion, namely the market for American Depository Receipts (ADRs).

The authors examine 190 option introductions on ADRs over the period of 1982 to 2006. The question of how ADRs are chosen for options listing, and whether those criteria differ from those found using purely domestic options, is addressed using logistic regressions. The authors use the event study methods of Brown and Warner to examine the price effect of the listing. They use OLS regression to identify determinants of the cumulative abnormal return upon option listing. Independent variables are those indicated by existing literature that examines option listing on domestic securities.

In an environment where the effective short sale constraint varies across firms, the authors find support for the contention that US option listings reduce the effect of the short sales constraint, providing relief for investors who have negative sentiment about the stock and are subject to a short sale constraint. However, it does not appear that option listing entities seek out companies for which short sale constraints are stronger.

The authors’ hypotheses are similar to those of Mayhew and Mihov and of Danielson and Sorescu, but the authors assert that the ADR market is a more robust environment in which to test the hypotheses. This is due to the potentially large variation in the effective short sale constraints that results from the differences in their underlying home market legal and regulatory environments. In addition to relative short interest and the change in relative short interest, this environment allows the authors to use indicator variables to directly test the ability of options to substitute for short sales.

The purpose of this study is to investigate if non-US/non-Canada (international) equity listings in the Canadian stock exchanges increased with the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Canada. A question of interest is whether the adoption of common global accounting standards (IFRS) was beneficial in attracting international firms to the Canadian exchanges.

The authors use difference-in-difference ordinary least square methodology to conduct inter-country (between Canada and the USA) and intra-country (between the Toronto Stock Exchange [TSX] and the TSX Venture Exchange [TSXV]) tests to investigate whether there is increased listings of international firms on Canada’s exchanges associated with mandatory adoption of IFRS in Canada compared to such listings in the American exchanges.

The authors did not find evidence of a relative increase in listings by international firms on the TSX and the TSXV after Canadian adoption of IFRS, but they did find that listings by international firms on the TSX, Canada’s primary exchange, increased when the authors include the year before mandatory Canadian adoption as part of the IFRS adoption period. The authors also find that international listings from outside the North American, European and Australasian regions increased on the TSXV, consistent with IFRS adoption making the smaller Canadian exchange more attractive to listers from these regions.

With the increasing use of IFRS throughout the world, US regulators, the US Congress and other capital market participants seek to understand the costs and benefits of potential IFRS adoption in the USA. The authors contribute to this debate by examining the effect of Canada’s adoption of IFRS on growth in international stock listings in the Canadian stock exchanges.

When a foreign firm cross-lists on an exchange in the US, it signals stronger investor protection. This is because cross-listing firms must comply with SEC and exchange regulations, thus producing stronger corporate governance. Consequently, cross-listing increases firm attractiveness to investors and places domestic rivals at a disadvantage. Rivals might respond by mimicking the governance changes resulting from cross-listing. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether firms respond to their rivals’ cross-listings through improvement in governance.

This study uses earnings management as a measure of governance for a set of international firms. The authors track the changes in governance of non-cross-listing firms following their rivals’ cross-listings. The authors employ an event study methodology to assess the spillover effect of a competitor’s cross-listing.

The authors find that rivals exhibit imitative improvements in their governance following a competitor’s cross-listing. This response is immediate and is the strongest in the year of cross-listing. Further, rivals with greater growth opportunities, lower market share, stronger past performance, and larger size demonstrate greater improvements in governance. Rivals make greater improvements in response to more rigorous Level III listings.

This study finds that cross-listing effects are underestimated. It is not only the investors of the listing-firms who benefit from the cross-listing, but also the investors of non-listing rival as competitors try to match the higher governance standard.

This study is the first that examines the intra-industry spillover effect of a cross-listing. This study also expands the analysis of the spillover effect in a new dimension: corporate governance.

Financial markets’ integration and technological advances in equity trading may have reduced the potential benefits from listing a firm's shares on a foreign exchange. Nevertheless, a significant number of firms continue to cross‐list every year. This paper examines the recent cross‐listing trends and reviews the literature on motives to cross‐list.

The literature review includes a summary of theoretical studies grouped into cross‐listing theories including market segmentation, liquidity, investor recognition, information disclosure, legal bonding, proximity preference and business strategy theories, and also includes a discussion of testable implications and empirical evidence for each of the above mentioned cross‐listing theories.

An extensive cross‐listing literature offers a number of theories on the motives to cross‐list that in most cases complement each other by encompassing different aspects of the complex cross‐listing behavior. Nevertheless, continuous market developments, such as significant regulatory and technological changes in the ways capital markets operate, raise new questions on why firms cross‐list and call for further research to continue.

To date there is little understanding of the factors that impact the survival of foreign IPOs after they list on US stock exchanges. In this study, we examine how foreign IPO survival is contingent on institutional factors associated with the firm’s home country. We also explore how corporate governance and organizational identity influence the survival of foreign IPOs in the United States. Results suggest that the US institutional environment supports foreign firms with more independent and professional leadership, and that knowledge-intense organizations have higher chances of long-term success after listing on US exchanges.

To attract funding from ethical investment trusts, it is expected that investee companies will need to undertake corporate social disclosure (CSD) in annual reports. This paper first explores the notion that companies included within the portfolio of ethical investment trusts (ETIs), are likely to provide a greater quantity of CSD than companies in which ethical trusts have not invested (NETIs). Second, the paper examines the characteristics of companies that undertake CSD, and their relationship to the ETI/NETI classification. Results from the examination of a sample of 300 Australian annual reports for 147 companies over a five‐year period (1990–1994), indicate that CSD is related to size, industry visibility, and company presence in both foreign countries and foreign stock exchanges. The significance of this paper, in addition to building upon empirical research into CSD, is that, in a range of circumstances, companies with an ethical investor as a shareholder, provide greater transparency about their social and environmental activities, than companies without an ethical investor. As a result, case can be made for the direct regulation and monitoring of ETI companies to be reduced, relative to NETIs, given that ethical investment may fulfil a market based regulatory function.

This paper explores the relationship between social movement protest, economic sabotage, state capitalism, the “Green Scare,” and public forms of political repression. Through a quantitative analysis of direct action activism highlighting the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front, the discourse surrounding mechanisms of social change and their impact on state power and capitalist accumulation will be examined. The analyses examines the earth and animal liberation movements, utilizing a Marxist-anarchist lens to illustrate how these non-state actors provide powerful critiques of capital and the state. Specifically, the discussion examines how state-sanctioned violence against these movements represents a return to Foucauldian Monarchical power. A quantitative-qualitative history will be used to argue that the movements’ actions fail to qualify as “terrorism,” and to examine the performance of power between the radical left and the state. State repression demonstrates not only the capitalist allegiances between government and industry, but also a sense of capital’s desperation hoping to counter a movement that has produced demonstrable victories by the means of bankrupting and isolating corporations. The government is taking such unconstitutional measures as a “talk back” between the revolutionary potential of these movements’ ideology as well as the challenge they present to state capitalism.

Although founders are often replaced with external CEOs prior to firms making IPOs, firms that do retain founder CEOs generally perform better at IPO. However, this relationship may be contingent upon context. This study aims to investigate how national context influences the relationship between a founder CEO and IPO long-run performance. The authors hypothesize that founder-CEOs will perform better in IPO firms in countries where managerial discretion, future orientation, and the level of conformity to professionalize management are high, and uncertainty avoidance is low.

Using insights from the upper echelon and institutional theory, the authors used hierarchical linear modeling to analyze over 1,000 firms across eight countries.

Founder CEOs perform best in IPO firms in a national context where managerial discretion is low, uncertainty avoidance is high and the level of conformity is high.

This study contributes to a growing area of cross-national IPO research in management by investigating the relationship between culture, management and IPO performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine financial integration across North American stock markets from January 1984 to December 2003.

The paper uses an arbitrage pricing theory framework. The risk factors considered are the three Fama and French factors augmented with momentum for both countries as well as their international counterparts. Both the domestic and international four factor models in cross section and test for partial, mild, and strong financial integration are estimated. The domestic and international model are estimated on domestic portfolios and on a subset of Canadian cross listings matched with American stocks.

Results can be summarized as follows: first, results show stronger evidence of mild rather than partial or strong integration in both domestic portfolios and interlisted stocks. Second, interlisted stocks appear at first glance to be more integrated than the domestic portfolios, but this result can be attributed to the poor explanatory power of the models applied to interlisted stocks. Once the authors rule out the case where the model does not generate statistically important risk premiums for both countries, the evidence of integration is similar in both domestic and interlisted stocks. Third, the domestic and international models have similar explanatory power, although the domestic model performs better with the Canadian interlisted stocks are found.

The results suggest that, in an international context, a portfolio manager is better off using the four factor model as a benchmark in cross sections rather than the single market. Furthermore, if the agency problem described in Karolyi is ignored, Canadian interlisted stocks and Canadian domestic portfolios have the same diversification potential.