Accruals quality,underwriter reputation,and corporate bond underpricing:Evidence from China

This study examines the relationship between accruals quality and the underpricing of corporate bonds in China and how underwriter reputation affects this relationship.We?nd that(1)accruals quality is negatively associated with the magnitude of bond underpricing and(2)the impact of low accruals quality on underpricing is partially offset by hiring reputable underwriters.A path analysis shows that approximately 11% of the effect of accruals quality on underpricing is attributable to the indirect path through reputable underwriters,suggesting that accruals quality is more effective than reputable underwriters in lowering bond underpricing.These?ndings are signi?cant for initial bond offerings,but not for secondary bond offerings.We also?nd that low accruals quality is associated with more restrictive non-price contract terms such as greater collateral requirements and stricter covenants.

Does reputation of sponsors matter in IPO?Evidence from Hong Kong

Contrary to other markets where underwriters perform a combined role of underwriting and sponsoring in an Initial Public Offering(IPO),IPO issuers in Hong Kong must appoint at least one sponsor in addition to the underwriters.The spitting of the single role of underwriters into two separate ones offers an ideal setting to disentangle the effects of the two roles and to examine which of the two roles-sponsor or underwriter--is more important in explaining IPO underpricing and initial volatility in the Hong Kong equity market.Interestingly,our findings provide supportive evidence that the sponsor reputation does matter in an IPO and it is even more significant than the underwriter reputation in explaining the IPO underpricing phenomenon.Given the recent high-tech fervor,our research goes deeper to examine specifically the role of sponsors on high-tech firms,with results indicating that the reliance on sponsors is higher for traditional isuers than for technology firms.We further discover that sponsors and underwriters are playing substitution roles rather than complementary roles.In order to examine the regulatory policy impact,our research also compares the role of IPO sponsors before and after the launch of the new sponsor regulatory regime in 2013.The empirical findings lend support to our argument that after the launch of the new regulations,public awareness of sponsors is raised,respect towards more reputable sponsor increases,and thus,the role of sponsors becomes more impotant than before.