期刊文献+

上市公司非公开发行资产注入行为的股东利益研究 被引量:20

Shareholders’Interests in Non-public Offerings of Asset Injection
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文首先对上市公司非公开发行资产注入行为的股东利益均衡问题进行了数理分析,数学推导得出,上市公司股东利益均衡的条件是非公开发行的增发价等于上市公司每股内在价值。本文继而选取中国股市49家通过非公开发行完成资产注入的上市公司作为样本进行实证考察。实证检验发现,中国上市公司通过非公开发行进行资产注入的新股定价普遍偏低,显著低于股票内在价值;同时,注入的资产大多为非优质资产。进一步研究发现,新股定价和注入资产的质量均与上市公司资产规模有一定联系:定价偏高的公司普遍资产规模较小,定价偏低的公司则资产规模较大;注入优质资产的公司规模一般较大,注入劣质资产的公司规模明显较小;而成本较高的资产注入行为,都是资产规模比较小的公司在该轮牛市中指数上涨最快的时期实施的,投机动机很强。实证结果表明,非公开发行资产注入中上市公司股东利益并不均衡,存在着众多大股东侵占小股东利益的现象。 This paper constructs a mathematical model to analyze the equilibrium of shareholder’s interests in the non-public offerings of asset injection, and demonstrates that the equality of non-public offering price and intrinsic value per share is the critical condition to realize the equilibrium. The empirical tests show that non-public offering prices are significantly lower than intrinsic value per share on average, and most of the assets injected are not high-quality assets. Further research finds there is some relationship between issue prices and sizes, and between asset quality and sizes. Companies whose issue prices are relatively high have smaller sizes and those whose prices are low have bigger sizes. At the same time, companies that receive good-asset injection are bigger and those that receive bad-asset injection are obviously smaller. Moreover, the fact that high cost injections are incurred by small companies in a bull market indicates a strong speculative motivation. The results of our study indicate that there is an interest inequality among shareholders in the non-public offerings of asset injection.
出处 《管理评论》 CSSCI 北大核心 2010年第7期17-26,共10页 Management Review
基金 教育部人文社科青年项目(09YJC90231) 国家自然科学基金项目(70701035) 湖南省杰出青年基金项目(09JJ1010) 湖南省教育厅创新平台项目(09K065)
关键词 资产注入 非公开发行 股东利益 内在价值 资产规模 asset injection non-public offerings shareholders’interests intrinsic value asset size
  • 相关文献

参考文献29

  • 1曾颖.资产注入:支付手段与市场反应[J].证券市场导报,2007(10):29-33. 被引量:22
  • 2章卫东.定向增发新股、整体上市与股票价格短期市场表现的实证研究[J].会计研究,2007(12):63-68. 被引量:134
  • 3Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. A Survey of Corporate Governance[J]. Journal of Finance, 1997, 52(2): 737-783.
  • 4La Porta, R., F.Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert W. Vishny. Investor Protection and Corporate Governance[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58(1):3-27.
  • 5La Porta, R., F.Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer. Corporate Ownership around The World[J]. Journal of Finance, 1999, 54(2): 471- 518.
  • 6La Porta, R., F.Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert W. Vishny. Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation[J]. Journal of Finance, 2002, 57(3): 1147-1170.
  • 7Johnson, Simon, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-De-Silanes and Andrei Shleifer. Tunneling[J]. The American Economic Review, 2000,90(2): 22-27.
  • 8Friedman, E., S. Johnson, and T. Mitton. Propping and Tunneling[J]. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2003, 31(4): 732-750.
  • 9Glaeser, E., S. Johnson, Andrei Shleifer. Coase Versus the Coasians[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2001, 116(3): 853-900.
  • 10Riyanto, E. and A. Toolsema, Tunneling and Propping: A Justification for Pyramidal Ownership. Working paper, National University of Sinagpore, 2003.

二级参考文献214

共引文献2460

同被引文献277

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部