IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

What drives the valuation premium in IPOs versus acquisitions? An empirical analysis

  • Bayar, Onur
  • Chemmanur, Thomas J.

Using a hand-collected data set of private firm acquisitions and IPOs, this paper develops the first empirical analysis in the literature of the “IPO valuation premium puzzle,” which refers to a situation where many private firms choose to be acquired rather than to go public at higher valuations. We also test several new hypotheses regarding a private firm's choice between IPOs and acquisitions. Our analysis of private firm valuations in IPOs and acquisitions indicates that IPO valuation premia disappear for larger VC backed firms after controlling for various observable factors affecting a firm's propensity to choose IPOs over acquisitions. Further, after controlling for the long-run component of the expected payoff to firm insiders from an IPO exit, we find that the IPO valuation premium vanishes even for larger non-VC backed firms and shrinks substantially for smaller firms as well. Our Heckman-style treatment effects regression analysis demonstrates that the above results are robust to controlling for the selection of exit mechanism by firm insiders based on unobservables. Our findings on private firms' choice between IPOs and acquisitions can be summarized as follows. First, firms operating in industries characterized by the absence of a dominant market player (and therefore more viable against product market competition) are more likely to go public rather than to be acquired. Second, more capital intensive firms, those operating in industries characterized by greater private benefits of control, and those which are harder to value by IPO market investors are more likely to go public rather than to be acquired. Third, the likelihood of an IPO over an acquisition is greater for venture backed firms and those characterized by higher pre-exit sales growth.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119912000090
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Corporate Finance.

Volume (Year): 18 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 451-475

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:18:y:2012:i:3:p:451-475
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jcorpfin

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.:

as in new window
  1. John Koeplin & Atulya Sarin & Alan C. Shapiro, 2000. "The Private Company Discount," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 12(4), pages 94-101.
  2. Hillion, Pierre & Vermaelen, Theo, 2004. "Death spiral convertibles," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 381-415, February.
  3. Cooney, John W. & Moeller, Thomas & Stegemoller, Mike, 2009. "The underpricing of private targets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 51-66, July.
  4. Paul J. Irvine & Jeffrey Pontiff, 2009. "Idiosyncratic Return Volatility, Cash Flows, and Product Market Competition," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 1149-1177, March.
  5. Officer, Micah S., 2007. "The price of corporate liquidity: Acquisition discounts for unlisted targets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 571-598, March.
  6. Christie, Andrew A., 1987. "On cross-sectional analysis in accounting research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 231-258, December.
  7. Philippe Aghion & Nicholas Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2002. "Competition and Innovation: An Inverted U Relationship," NBER Working Papers 9269, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Nickell, S.J., 1993. "Competition and Crporate Performance," Economics Series Working Papers 99155, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  9. Ritter, Jay R, 1991. " The Long-run Performance of Initial Public Offerings," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(1), pages 3-27, March.
  10. Leland, Hayne E & Pyle, David H, 1977. "Informational Asymmetries, Financial Structure, and Financial Intermediation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(2), pages 371-87, May.
  11. repec:cup:jfinqa:v:46:y:2011:i:06:p:1755-1793_00 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Heckman, James J, 1979. "Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 153-61, January.
  13. Krishnaswami, Sudha & Subramaniam, Venkat, 1999. "Information asymmetry, valuation, and the corporate spin-off decision," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 73-112, July.
  14. Jos�-Miguel Gaspar, 2006. "Idiosyncratic Volatility and Product Market Competition," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(6), pages 3125-3152, November.
  15. Amiyatosh K. Purnanandam, 2004. "Are IPOs Really Underpriced?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 811-848.
  16. Raghuram Rajan & Julie Wulf, 2004. "Are Perks Purely Managerial Excess?," NBER Working Papers 10494, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Belén Villalonga, 2004. "Does Diversification Cause the "Diversification Discount"?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 33(2), Summer.
  18. Laura Casares Field, 2001. "The Expiration of IPO Share Lockups," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(2), pages 471-500, 04.
  19. James C. Brau & Bill Francis & Ninon Kohers, 2003. "The Choice of IPO versus Takeover: Empirical Evidence," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(4), pages 583-612, October.
  20. Annette B. Poulsen & Mike Stegemoller, 2008. "Moving from Private to Public Ownership: Selling Out to Public Firms versus Initial Public Offerings," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 37(1), pages 81-101, 03.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:18:y:2012:i:3:p:451-475. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.