IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfinec/v146y2022i1p27-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bucking the trend: Why do IPOs choose controversial governance structures and why do investors let them?

Author

Listed:
  • Field, Laura Casares
  • Lowry, Michelle

Abstract

While the percentage of mature firms with classified boards or dual class shares has declined by more than 40% since 1990, the percentage of IPO firms with these structures has doubled over this period. We test whether IPO firms implement these structures optimally or whether they are utilized to allow managers to protect their private benefits of control. Both shareholder voting patterns and changes in firm types going public suggest that the Agency Hypothesis best explains IPO firm's use of dual class, particularly when there is a large voting-cash flow wedge. In contrast, among firms with high information asymmetry, classified board structures are better explained by the Optimal Governance hypothesis.

Suggested Citation

  • Field, Laura Casares & Lowry, Michelle, 2022. "Bucking the trend: Why do IPOs choose controversial governance structures and why do investors let them?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 27-54.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfinec:v:146:y:2022:i:1:p:27-54
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2022.06.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304405X2200143X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jfineco.2022.06.004?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stein, Jeremy C, 1988. "Takeover Threats and Managerial Myopia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(1), pages 61-80, February.
    2. Duru, Augustine & Wang, Dechun & Zhao, Yijiang, 2013. "Staggered boards, corporate opacity and firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 341-360.
    3. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 43-58, January.
    4. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Cohen, Alma, 2005. "The costs of entrenched boards," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 409-433, November.
    5. Jeremy C. Stein, 1989. "Efficient Capital Markets, Inefficient Firms: A Model of Myopic Corporate Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(4), pages 655-669.
    6. Paul A. Gompers & Joy Ishii & Andrew Metrick, 2010. "Extreme Governance: An Analysis of Dual-Class Firms in the United States," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 1051-1088, March.
    7. Alchian, Armen A & Demsetz, Harold, 1972. "Production , Information Costs, and Economic Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 777-795, December.
    8. Cremers, K.J. Martijn & Litov, Lubomir P. & Sepe, Simone M., 2017. "Staggered boards and long-term firm value, revisited," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 422-444.
    9. Aggarwal, Dhruv & Eldar, Ofer & Hochberg, Yael V. & Litov, Lubomir P., 2022. "The rise of dual-class stock IPOs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 122-153.
    10. Coles, Jeffrey L. & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Boards: Does one size fit all," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 329-356, February.
    11. Ahn, Seoungpil & Shrestha, Keshab, 2013. "The differential effects of classified boards on firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 3993-4013.
    12. Faleye, Olubunmi, 2007. "Classified boards, firm value, and managerial entrenchment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 501-529, February.
    13. Guo, Re-Jin & Kruse, Timothy A. & Nohel, Tom, 2008. "Undoing the powerful anti-takeover force of staggered boards," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 274-288, June.
    14. Tim Loughran & Jay Ritter, 2004. "Why Has IPO Underpricing Changed Over Time?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 33(3), Fall.
    15. Field, Laura & Lowry, Michelle & Mkrtchyan, Anahit, 2013. "Are busy boards detrimental?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 63-82.
    16. Cohen, Alma & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2013. "How do staggered boards affect shareholder value? Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 627-641.
    17. Jensen, Michael C, 1988. "Takeovers: Their Causes and Consequences," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 21-48, Winter.
    18. Michael Ewens & Joan Farre-Mensa, 2020. "The Deregulation of the Private Equity Markets and the Decline in IPOs," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(12), pages 5463-5509.
    19. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Cohen, Alma & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2013. "Learning and the disappearing association between governance and returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 323-348.
    20. Peter Iliev & Michelle Lowry, 2015. "Are Mutual Funds Active Voters?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(2), pages 446-485.
    21. Hyunseob Kim & Roni Michaely, 2019. "Sticking around Too Long? Dynamics of the Benefits of Dual-Class Voting," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 19-09, Swiss Finance Institute, revised Mar 2019.
    22. Nadya Malenko & Yao Shen, 2016. "The Role of Proxy Advisory Firms: Evidence from a Regression-Discontinuity Design," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(12), pages 3394-3427.
    23. Johnson, William C. & Karpoff, Jonathan M. & Yi, Sangho, 2015. "The bonding hypothesis of takeover defenses: Evidence from IPO firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 307-332.
    24. Bhojraj, Sanjeev & Sengupta, Partha & Zhang, Suning, 2017. "Takeover defenses: Entrenchment and efficiency," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 142-160.
    25. Lucian Arye Bebchuk & John C. Coates IV & Guhan Subramanian, 2002. "The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence and Policy," NBER Working Papers 8974, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Romano, Roberta, 1985. "Law as a Product: Some Pieces of the Incorporation Puzzle," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 225-283, Fall.
    27. Bates, Thomas W. & Becher, David A. & Lemmon, Michael L., 2008. "Board classification and managerial entrenchment: Evidence from the market for corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 656-677, March.
    28. repec:oup:revfin:v:29:y:2016:i:12:p:3394-3427. is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Laura Casares Field & Jonathan M. Karpoff, 2002. "Takeover Defenses of IPO Firms," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 1857-1889, October.
    30. Ronald W. Masulis & Cong Wang & Fei Xie, 2009. "Agency Problems at Dual‐Class Companies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1697-1727, August.
    31. Luigi Zingales, 1995. "Insider Ownership and the Decision to Go Public," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(3), pages 425-448.
    32. Smart, Scott B. & Thirumalai, Ramabhadran S. & Zutter, Chad J., 2008. "What's in a vote The short- and long-run impact of dual-class equity on IPO firm values," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 94-115, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hoontaek Seo & Sangho Yi & William McCumber, 2024. "Friendly Boards and the Cost of Debt," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Kim, Soohyung, 2023. "Dual-class share structure and firm risks," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Michelle Lowry, 2024. "The questions being asked: Academic research, the media, and regulators," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 59(3), pages 549-560, August.
    4. Seoungpil Ahn, 2024. "The Value of Takeover Defenses and the Interaction Effects of Firm Characteristics," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-16, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cremers, K.J. Martijn & Litov, Lubomir P. & Sepe, Simone M., 2017. "Staggered boards and long-term firm value, revisited," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 422-444.
    2. Mbanyele, William, 2021. "Staggered boards, unequal voting rights, poison pills and innovation intensity: New evidence from the Asian markets," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Suparatana Tanthanongsakkun & Sirimon Treepongkaruna & Pornsit Jiraporn, 2023. "Carbon emissions, corporate governance, and staggered boards," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 769-780, January.
    4. Ahn, Seoungpil & Shrestha, Keshab, 2013. "The differential effects of classified boards on firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 3993-4013.
    5. Guernsey, Scott & Sepe, Simone M. & Serfling, Matthew, 2022. "Blood in the water: The value of antitakeover provisions during market shocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1070-1096.
    6. Cremers, K. J. Martijn & Litov, Lubomir P. & Sepe, Simone M., 2013. "Staggered Boards and Firm Value, Revisited," Working Papers 13-36, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, Weiss Center.
    7. Amihud, Yakov & Stoyanov, Stoyan, 2017. "Do staggered boards harm shareholders?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 432-439.
    8. Aggarwal, Dhruv & Eldar, Ofer & Hochberg, Yael V. & Litov, Lubomir P., 2022. "The rise of dual-class stock IPOs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 122-153.
    9. Chen, I-Ju & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Wang, Yanzhi, 2022. "Staggered boards and product innovations: Evidence from Massachusetts State Bill HB 5640," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    10. Weili Ge & Lloyd Tanlu & Jenny Li Zhang, 2016. "What are the consequences of board destaggering?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 808-858, September.
    11. Hongchao Zeng, 2014. "Financial Constraints, Antitakeover Protection, and Corporate Innovation: An Empirical Analysis using Antitakeover Legislation," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 4, pages 1-15, August.
    12. Bhargava, Rahul & Faircloth, Sheri & Zeng, Hongchao, 2017. "Takeover protection and stock price crash risk: Evidence from state antitakeover laws," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 177-184.
    13. Yonca Ertimur & Fabrizio Ferri & David Oesch, 2018. "Understanding Uncontested Director Elections," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3400-3420, July.
    14. Renee B. Adams & Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2010. "The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 58-107, March.
    15. Becker-Blease, John R., 2011. "Governance and innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 947-958, September.
    16. Tristan Oliver Stenzaly, 2023. "The effect of staggered boards on firm value during market shocks," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 37(4), pages 457-497, December.
    17. Duru, Augustine & Wang, Dechun & Zhao, Yijiang, 2013. "Staggered boards, corporate opacity and firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 341-360.
    18. Baulkaran, Vishaal, 2014. "Management entrenchment and the valuation discount of dual class firms," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 70-81.
    19. Chen, Dong, 2012. "Classified boards, the cost of debt, and firm performance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 3346-3365.
    20. Anne Anderson & Jill Brown & Parveen P. Gupta, 2017. "Jurisdictional competition for corporate charters and firm value: a reexamination of the Delaware effect," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(4), pages 341-356, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    IPOs; Governance; Dual class; Classified boards; Shareholder voting; Founders; Carve-outs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance

    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:eee:jfinec:v:146:y:2022:i:1:p:27-54. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505576 .

    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.