The incremental value relevance of firm-specific risk measures in pricing junk IPOs
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe a study which examined the effects of underwriter reputation market segments on the value relevance of firm specific risk measures in the pricing of initial public offerings (IPOs). Design/methodology/approach – The study abandons the notion of a homogenous market for IPOs and focuses instead on the differential demand for information across identifiable segments of the IPO market in the pre-market offering period leading to the first day trading closing prices. Ordinary least square (OLS) regressions were used to test the two hypotheses developed in the paper. Findings – It was found that firm-specific risk measures are associated with the initial trading day returns of IPOs managed by low reputation underwriters, but not those by high reputation underwriters. However, as expected, these risk measures are impounded in initial trading day returns only for a sub-sample of high-risk junk IPOs that were marked down in price by the underwriter prior to the offering in order to make them more attractive to investors. Research limitations – As with all empirical studies the tests are joint tests of the hypotheses stipulated and econometric assumptions underlying OLS. The findings of the study may not be generalized to an unrelated domain. Practical implications – The findings suggest that ex ante risk measures are useful in picking among junk IPOs those with the best chances of survival, and thus earning an initial trading return on those IPOs. Originality/value – This is the first study to look at junk IPOs in a systematic manner using a quasi-experimental design.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 5 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=raf Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:rafpps:v:5:y:2006:i:3:p:251-267. 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: (Louise Lister)
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.