IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jbfnac/v40y2013i1-2p215-238.html

Seasoned Equity Offerings: Stock Market Liquidity and the Rights Offer Paradox

Author

Listed:
  • Edith Ginglinger
  • Laure Matsoukis
  • Fabrice Riva

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of market liquidity on seasoned equity offerings (SEO) characteristics in France. We find that, besides blockholders' takeup, liquidity is an important determinant of SEO flotation method choice. We document higher direct equity offering flotation costs, but also improved stock market liquidity after public offerings and standby rights relative to uninsured rights. After controlling for endogeneity in the choice of SEO flotation method, we find that pure public offerings and standby rights are comparable in terms of direct costs and liquidity improvement. Our results provide new insights as to why firms choose public offerings despite apparently higher costs.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Edith Ginglinger & Laure Matsoukis & Fabrice Riva, 2013. "Seasoned Equity Offerings: Stock Market Liquidity and the Rights Offer Paradox," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1-2), pages 215-238, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:40:y:2013:i:1-2:p:215-238
    DOI: 10.1111/jbfa.2013.40.issue-1-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/10.1111/jbfa.2013.40.issue-1-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jbfa.2013.40.issue-1-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Johannes Atle Skjeltorp & Bernt Arne Ødegaard, 2015. "When Do Listed Firms Pay for Market Making in Their Own Stock?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 44(2), pages 241-266, June.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/15219 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Gao, Xuechen & Hsu, Yuan-Teng & Wang, Xuewu (Wesley) & Yuan, Weici, 2022. "The choice of flotation methods: Evidence from Chinese seasoned equity offerings," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Joachim Rojahn & Florian Zechser, 2022. "Ownership concentration, ownership identity and seasoned equity offerings probabilities: Evidence from Germany," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1-2), pages 274-296, January.
    5. Balasingham Balachandran & Sutharson Kanapathippillai & Chandrasekhar Krishnamurti & Michael Theobald & Eswaran Velayutham, 2017. "The issuance of warrants in rights offerings: Agency costs and signaling effects," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 42(4), pages 608-636, November.
    6. Prasad, Mason & Bakry, Walid & Varua, Maria Estela, 2021. "Abnormal volatility in seasoned equity offerings during economic disruptions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C).
    7. David, Thomas & Ginglinger, Edith, 2016. "When cutting dividends is not bad news: The case of optional stock dividends," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 174-191.
    8. Labidi, Manel & Gajewski, Jean François, 2019. "Does increased disclosure of intangible assets enhance liquidity around new equity offerings?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 426-437.
    9. Andini Nurwulandari & Hasanudin Hasanudin & Melati Melati, 2021. "Market Reactions on Corporate Actions in Growing and Nongrowing Energy Consuming Companies," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(3), pages 290-295.

    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:jbfnac:v:40:y:2013:i:1-2:p:215-238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0306-686X .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.