This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Quid Pro Quo in IPOs: Why Book-building is Dominating Auctions

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
François Degeorge (University of Lugano)
François Derrien (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto)
Kent L. Womack (Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The book-building procedure for selling initial public offerings to investors has captured significant market share from auction alternatives in recent years, despite significantly lower costs in both direct fees and initial underpricing when using the auction mechanism. This paper shows that in the French market, where the frequency of book-building and auctions was about equal in the 1990s, the ostensible advantages to the issuer using book-building were advertising-related quid pro quo benefits. Specifically, we find that book-built issues were more likely to be followed and positively recommended by the lead underwriters and were also more likely to receive “booster shots” post issuance if the shares had fallen. Even non-underwriters’ analysts appear to promote book-built issues more, but only when their underwriters stood to gain from acquiring shares in future issues from the recommended firm’s lead underwriter. Bookbuilt issues also appeared to garner more press in general (but only after they had chosen book-building, not before). Yet, we do not observe valuation or return differentials to suggest that these types of promotion have any value to the issuing firm. We conclude that underwriters using the book-building procedure have convinced issuers of the questionable value of advertising and promotion of their shares.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.feem.it/NR/rdonlyres/8D4BE49D-E334-419F-B27A-2838DB88D4AD/1356/15004.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei in its series Working Papers with number 2004.150.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2004.150

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Corso Magenta, 63 - 20123 Milan
Phone: 0039-2-52036934
Fax: 0039-2-52036946
Email:
Web page: http://www.feem.it/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (barbara racah).

Related research
Keywords: Auction; IPOs;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Auctions
D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Monopoly

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Michaely, Roni & Womack, Kent L, 1999. "Conflict of Interest and the Credibility of Underwriter Analyst Recommendations," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(4), pages 653-86.
  2. FranÁois Derrien & Kent L. Womack, 2003. "Auctions vs. Bookbuilding and the Control of Underpricing in Hot IPO Markets," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 16(1), pages 31-61.
  3. Dunbar, Craig G., 2000. "Factors affecting investment bank initial public offering market share," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 3-41, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Krigman, Laurie & Shaw, Wayne H. & Womack, Kent L., 2001. "Why do firms switch underwriters?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2-3), pages 245-284, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Daniel J. Bradley & Bradford D. Jordan & Jay R. Ritter, 2008. "Analyst Behavior Following IPOs: The 'Bubble Period' Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 101-133, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Habib, Michel A & Ljungqvist, Alexander P, 2001. "Underpricing and Entrepreneurial Wealth Losses in IPOs: Theory and Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 433-58.
    Other versions:
  7. Ljungqvist, Alexander P & Marston, Felicia & Wilhelm Jr, William J, 2003. "Competing for Securities Underwriting Mandates: Banking Relationships and Analyst Recommendations," CEPR Discussion Papers 4162, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Kenji Kutsuna, 2004. "Why Does Book Building Drive Out Auction Methods of IPO Issuance? Evidence from Japan," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 1129-1166. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Aggarwal, Rajesh K. & Krigman, Laurie & Womack, Kent L., 2002. "Strategic IPO underpricing, information momentum, and lockup expiration selling," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 105-137, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Hsuan-Chi Chen & Jay R. Ritter, 2000. "The Seven Percent Solution," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(3), pages 1105-1131, 06. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Daniel J. Bradley & Bradford D. Jordan & Jay R. Ritter, 2003. "The Quiet Period Goes out with a Bang," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(1), pages 1-36, 02. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Biais, Bruno & Bossaerts, Peter & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2002. "An Optimal IPO Mechanism," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 69(1), pages 117-46, January.
    Other versions:
  13. Womack, Kent L, 1996. " Do Brokerage Analysts' Recommendations Have Investment Value?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 137-67, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Loughran, Tim & Ritter, Jay R. & Rydqvist, Kristian, 1994. "Initial public offerings: International insights," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 2(2-3), pages 165-199, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  15. Biais, Bruno & Faugeron-Crouzet, Anne Marie, 2002. "IPO Auctions: English, Dutch, ... French, and Internet," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 9-36, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  16. Sherman, Ann E, 2000. "IPOs and Long-Term Relationships: An Advantage of Book Building," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 697-714.
  17. Tim Loughran & Jay Ritter, 2004. "Why Has IPO Underpricing Changed Over Time?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 33(3), Fall.
  18. Benveniste, Lawrence M. & Spindt, Paul A., 1989. "How investment bankers determine the offer price and allocation of new issues," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 343-361. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also computes impact factors for journals and working paper series.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-3.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.