IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/annpce/v81y2010i2p247-280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mutual Versus Proprietary Ownership: An Empirical Study From The Uk Unit Trust Industry With A Company-Product Measure

Author

Listed:
  • Yoshikatsu Shinozawa

Abstract

In the debate of the relative merits of differing ownership forms, most empirical studies examine either corporate performance or the product characteristics of the financial products that are available in the financial services industry. Based on the UK unit trust industry, this paper assesses which ownership form, mutual or proprietary is more efficient in managing unit trust operations and providing high return generating unit trusts. Using a combined corporate performance and product range performance metric, this study reveals no significant differences between the two ownership forms in terms of the corporate-product performance score. The results indicate that the owner-customer fused role in the mutual organization must be considered in the mutual versus proprietary ownership debate. Copyright © 2010 The Author Journal compilation © CIRIEC 2010.

Suggested Citation

  • Yoshikatsu Shinozawa, 2010. "Mutual Versus Proprietary Ownership: An Empirical Study From The Uk Unit Trust Industry With A Company-Product Measure," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(2), pages 247-280, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:annpce:v:81:y:2010:i:2:p:247-280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showTOC&journalCode=apce&volume=81&issue=2&year=2010&part=null
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:annpce:v:81:y:2010:i:2:p:247-280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1370-4788 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.