Search results

A variety of papers have analyzed the underpricing of REIT IPOs or property company IPOs. The purpose of this paper is to compare the two sectors and examines differences in the underpricing of the two types of IPOs.

An OLS regression is used to identify factors influencing the underpricing of A-REIT and property company IPOs from 1994 until 2014.

This study finds that A-REIT IPOs have a significantly lower underpricing on average than Australian property company IPOs. The time taken to list appears to influence the underpricing of both A-REIT IPOs and property company IPOs, in that issues that are filled more quickly have higher underpricing but with the magnitude of the impact being less for A-REITs. The sentiment toward the stock market also appears to impact on the underpricing of A-REIT and property company IPOs again with the magnitude of the impact being less for A-REITs.

The paper provides information to new A-REIT and property company issuers, underwriters and investors.

The study is the first to compare and examine the differences in the underpricing of both REITs and property companies in the one country over the same time period.

Initial public offering (IPO) underpricing remains a puzzle after decades of investigation. The stock markets in emerging economies are attractive to international investors but their unique characteristics need to be examined. Chinese stock markets experienced much more significant IPO underpricing than most other stock markets in the world. This paper offers a two-period wealth maximum model to explain the strategic IPO underpricing by state owners. Given the fact that the entire IPO procedure, including IPO price, is regulated and controlled by state owners, we argue that state owners strategically underprice the IPO, because they care less about the IPO proceeds but more about the wealth gain after IPO. The empirical finding of a positive relationship between IPO underpricing and state ownership in Chinese stock market is consistent with the wealth maximization hypothesis of IPO pricing. The paper offers better understanding for IPO procedure of state-owned enterprises in emerging markets.

Since 2018, there has been a resurgence in initial public offering (IPO) pricing studies. The authors aim to consolidate the knowledge and explore current dynamics, understand knowledge progression, elicit trends, and provide future research directions for IPO pricing research.

The authors conducted a two-stage hybrid review based on 512 high-quality Scopus articles on IPO pricing published over the last decade. The authors deploy bibliometric analysis, and then, based on 61 curated articles, the authors conduct content analysis and offer future research directions.

Four key research streams emerged: information asymmetry, agency problems, legal, regulatory, and social environment, and behavioral finance. Future research may focus on behavioral explanations for IPO underpricing, the role of investor sentiment in IPO pricing, text analytics, machine learning, and big data in alleviating information asymmetry and agency problems. The authors summarize and present content analysis using the classic Theory, Context, Characteristics, Methods (TCCM) framework.

Using different databases, bibliometric analysis tools, sample period or article screening criteria for the study might give different results. However, the study's major findings are robust to alternative choices.

This study serves as a ready reckoner for the research scholars, practitioners, regulators, policymakers, and investors interested in understanding the nuances of IPO pricing.

The study sheds light on the most influential documents, authors, and journals, offers an understanding of knowledge structure, identifies and discusses primary research streams and related implications, and provides future research directions.

This paper aims to study the underpricing phenomenon of initial public offerings (IPOs) of 355 Indian companies issued from 2007 to 2019. The research question this paper empirically examines is whether Indian corporate executives deliberately underprice IPOs from its fair value to attract investors, thereby causing an abnormal spike in the prices on the listing day. The findings of this study challenge a commonly held notion of leaving money on the table by IPO issuing companies. Of the overall average listing day returns of 17%, the deliberate premarket underpricing component is found to be mere 5.3%, while the remaining price fluctuation is, inter alia, a result of market momentum along with the unmet demands of impatient investors.

Following Koop and Li (2001), this study uses Stochastic frontier model (SFM) to study a routine anomaly of disparity between the primary market price (i.e. IPO issue price) and the secondary market price (listing price). The jump in the issue price observed on a listing day is decomposed into deliberate premarket underpricing component that reflects the extent of managerial manipulation and the after-market misvaluation component attributable to information asymmetry and prevailing market volatility.

This paper uses SFM to bifurcate initial returns into deliberate underpricing by managers and after-market mispricing by noise traders. This study finds that a significant part of the initial return is explained through after-market mispricing. This study finds that average initial returns are 17%, deliberate premarket underpricing is 5.3% and after-market mispricing averages 11.9%.

This study can isolate underpricing done at the premarket by estimating a systematic one-sided error term that measures the maximum predicted issue price deviation from the offered price. Consequentially, the disaggregation of initial returns may be especially informative for retail investors in planning their exit strategy from an IPO by separating the strength of the firm's fundamentals and its causal relationship with the initial returns. Substantial proportion of after-market mispricing implies that future research should focus on factors causing after-market mispricing. As underlying causes are identified, tailor-made policy responses can be formulated to benefit investors.

This paper has empirically validated that initial return is a mix of both components, i.e. deliberate underpricing and aftermarket mispricing. This disaggregation of initial returns can prove helpful for investors in planning their exit strategy. This study can help investors to become more aware of the importance of the fundamentals of the firm and its causal relation with the initial returns. This information in turn can help reduce the information asymmetry amongst investors and help them lessen the costs of adverse selection.

A large number of research studies on IPO pricing find overwhelming evidence of underpricing in public issues. This research attempts to decompose the extent of underpricing into deliberate underpricing and after-market mispricing, thereby supplementing the existing literature on the IPO pricing puzzle. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first contribution to the literature on initial return decomposition for the Indian capital markets.

We study the relationship between underwriter prestige, family control, and IPO underpricing in an international setting. Data are collected for 5,789 firms that went public across twenty‐five countries between 1995 and 2002. We find that non‐penny‐stock and non‐U.S. IPOs from countries where firms are predominately family‐controlled benefit from associations with well‐known investment bankers; i.e., these firms are less underpriced than similar firms from countries with a low level of family control. At the same time, our findings support prior evidence that suggests that underwriter prestige is positively related to underpricing in the U.S. IPO market. Family‐controlled firms should consider the findings of this study, which identifies factors that are associated with more successful IPO outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze underpricing in initial coin offerings (ICO). It bridges the gap between findings in initial public offering (IPO) literature and empirical results from ICOs.

The sample set consists of 279 ICOs between April 2013 and January 2018. A regression analysis is performed with data from the ICOs.

The results show an average level of underpricing of ICOs of 123 percent in the USA and 97 percent in the other countries. The results for the US ICOs are significantly higher than for US IPOs on average and also higher than US IPOs at the beginning of the dot.com bubble. The authors also study the determinants of ICO underpricing. The authors use proxies based on asymmetric information from the IPO literature as well as ICO-related variables. First-day trading volume and a good sentiment on the ICO market go together with more ICO underpricing. Moreover, hot markets make first-day investors to benefit less. Finally, companies that use a large issue size or a pre-ICO (a sale of cryptocurrencies before the ICO) leave less money on the table.

A first restriction is that the authors focus on ICOs and not on crowdfunding, though there are similarities in that both of them are novel ways to finance projects. A second restriction is that the authors had to decide on the definition of a listing day. Cryptocurrencies are traded on many exchanges, and if the exchange is tailored to the cryptocurrency itself, the data on, e.g., close prices are not necessarily to be trusted. The authors, therefore, decided to use close price data from coinmarketcap.com, which requires a listing on two exchanges. This choice implies that there may have been trades before the listing day itself. A third restriction arises from the relative newness of the ICO phenomenon. The authors gathered data on underpricing from coinmarketcap.com and combined that with project information from icobench.com. However, the data were not simply matched and they required manual adjustments based on several other sources. The authors hope that in due time data on ICOs will be as adequate as data on IPOs and that they become more readily available. It might help if regulators or the crypto community would institute publication requirements. Adherence to such requirements would also reduce the extent of fraud and of asymmetric information, so that solid issuers with good projects might benefit from less underpricing.

The research may help in reducing underpricing, as the authors find that issuers can reduce it by holding a pre-ICO and by considering larger issue sizes. If they do so, investors will get fewer opportunities to benefit from underpricing. Investors can, nevertheless, also profit from the knowledge generated in this paper. When market sentiment is positive and first-day trading volume is expected to be high, investing in ICOs is likely to give them higher first-day returns. Finally, the authors hope that this paper will serve as a basis for further research into the exciting and dynamic world of cryptocurrencies.

There is hardly any research on underpricing of ICOs. The paper is interesting for its table with a brief comparison of ICOs and IPOs. It also searches for variables from the asymmetric information theory behind IPOs to be applied in explaining ICOs. It shows high levels of ICO underpricing in comparison to IPOs. It also gives suggestions for issuers of (and investors in) ICOs.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether and how underpricing is associated with board structure and corporate ownership among firms conducting initial public offerings (IPOs) in the Indonesian equity market.

To capture the most recent development, the sample comprises 101 firms conducting IPOs in Indonesia's primary equity market in the period of 2003‐2011. The explanatory variables consist of board size, board independence, ownership concentration, and institutional ownership. In further analysis, the authors perform regressions considering three types of the controlling shareholder, namely families, foreign entities, and the government.

Providing some support for signaling theory, it is found that board independence is positively related to the level of underpricing. Further, this study provides evidence that the level of underpricing is negatively associated with both board size and institutional ownership, indicating that these two governance mechanisms play important roles in mitigating information asymmetry between the issuer and potential investors. Ownership concentration is insignificant in explaining the first‐day returns. When the type of corporate control is taken into account, it is revealed that government‐controlled companies tend to experience higher underpricing.

This paper contributes to the IPO underpricing literature since the influence of corporate governance mechanisms on initial returns is relatively under‐researched, particularly within the context of emerging markets.

Although many theories aim to explain initial public offering (IPO) underpricing, initial-day returns of US Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) IPOs remain a “puzzle”. The literature on REIT IPOs has focused on indirect quantitative proxies for information asymmetries between REITs and investors to determine IPO underpricing. This study, however, proposes textual analysis to exploit the qualitative information, revealed through one of the most important documents during the IPO process – Form S-11 – as a direct measure of information asymmetries.

This study determines the level of uncertain language in the prospectus, as well as its similarity to recently filed registration statements, to assess whether textual features can solve the underpricing puzzle. It assumes that uncertain language makes it more difficult for potential investors to price the issue and thus increases underpricing. Furthermore, it is hypothesized that a higher similarity to previous filings indicates that the prospectus provides little useful information and thus does not resolve existing information asymmetries, leading to increased underpricing.

Contrary to expectations, this research does not find a statistically significant association between uncertain language in Form S-11 and initial-day returns. This result is interpreted as suggesting that uncertain language in the prospectus does not reflect the issuer's expectations about the company's future prospects, but rather is necessary because of forecasting difficulties and litigation risk. Analyzing disclosure similarity instead, this study finds a statistically and economically significant impact of qualitative information on initial-day returns. Thus, REIT managers may reduce underpricing by voluntarily providing more information to potential investors in Form S-11.

The results demonstrate that textual analysis can in fact help to explain underpricing of US REIT IPOs, as qualitative information in Forms S-11 decreases information asymmetries between US REIT managers and investors, thus reducing underpricing. Consequently, REIT managers are incentivized to provide as much information as possible to reduce underpricing, while investors could use textual analysis to identify offerings that promise the highest returns.

This is the first study which applies textual analysis to corporate disclosures of US REITs in order to explain IPO underpricing.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between corporate reputation and initial public offering (IPO) underpricing for a sample of 269 IPOs hitting the Indian capital market for the first time during the period ranging from April 1, 2007 to November 8, 2016.

The study is based on secondary data (of 269 Indian companies going public) obtained from websites of capital market, Chittorgarh and Securities and Exchange Board of India (from where prospectus of each company was downloaded individually to extract data on financial variables). The study devises the technique of multivariate regression analysis to arrive at the results.

The results of the study reveal that corporate reputation serves as a signal to naive investors that assures them of issuer company’s credibility, resulting in lower underpricing. In addition to it, the study also observes the level of gender diversity on Indian boards. It is disappointing to notice low level of female representation on Indian boards and the improvement if any made in the number of female directors on Indian boards is due to provisions of new companies’ act, 2013 that mandates at least one women director on the board of every listed company. Thus, females do not constitute a critical mass on Indian boards.

The current study scrutinizes the impact of corporate reputation on IPO underpricing only. Furthermore, the study analyzes the underpricing of only book built IPOs. Incorporating both book built and fixed price IPOs could have provided better insights into the issue.

The study outlines significant implications for managers of issuer company to portray company’s own reputation as a signal instead of showcasing borrowed reputation of external agents at the crucial juncture of going public.

Many signals portraying quality of the offering are sent by issuer company in public arena to make IPO launch a successful event. Among many such signals like underwriting reputation, auditor reputation, director’s and CEO’s reputation, the corporate audience has started giving more impetus to issuer company’s own reputation. Thus, financial academia witnessed a paradigm shift from external agents reputation to internal agent’s reputation and now the loci of interest has shifted to company’s own reputation. Giving emphasis to corporate reputation seems more relevant in emerging economies like India where naive investors rely on their own judgments while making investment decision who take clue from various signals to infer quality of the offer. It is momentous to observe whether reputation of the company acts as a conspicuous signal to decipher IPO quality. Furthermore, there hardly exists any empirical research directly examining the impact of corporate reputation on IPO underpricing in the Indian context. Hence, the present study is a modest attempt to fill this gap in literature.

The purpose of this study is to examine the differences between initial public offering (IPO) pricing in the real estate sector and to provide insight into how real estate investment trust (REIT) and real estate operating company (REOC) IPOs perform in a comparative framework.

The sample consists of 107 European REIT and REOC IPOs from nine European countries over the period 2000-2015. The initial returns are examined by creating subsamples based on the two business forms, countries and specific timeframes (before, during and after the global financial crisis). A multiple regression analysis is applied to identify the ex-ante uncertainty factors, IPO and firm characteristics, which may impact on the different underpricing levels of REITs and REOCs.

European property companies are on average significantly underpriced by 4.63 per cent. The results also reveal that REITs provide a significantly lower underpricing of 2.02 per cent than REOCs, with a positive initial return of 5.69 per cent. The causal treatment effect of the legal form of the company and the underpricing is confirmed by propensity score matching. Among the most influential factors for a lower REIT underpricing, besides the REIT-status itself, are the volatility, offer size and market phase of the IPO. During the global financial crisis (GFC) (2008-2010), underpricing exceeds the initial return for the total sample by approximately 70 per cent.

This is the first study investigating differences in the underpricing level of REITs and REOCs in a European setting, including the GFC as an extraordinary market phase. The authors provide evidence that REIT IPOs compared to REOC IPOs “leave less money on the table”.