The role of lending-relationship banks in the underwriting of seasoned equity offerings: Conflict of interest or certification?

被引:0
作者
Chen, Hsuan-Chi [1 ]
Chou, De-Wai [2 ]
Lai, Christine W. [2 ]
Yeh, Yi-Ting [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ New Mexico, Anderson Sch Management, Albuquerque, NM 87131 USA
[2] Natl Taiwan Normal Univ, Coll Management, Grad Inst Management, Taipei 10610, Taiwan
[3] Yuan Univ, Dept Finance, Coll Management, Taoyuan, Taiwan
关键词
Certification; Conflict of interest; Seasoned equity offering; Lending-relationship; GLASS-STEAGALL ACT; COMMERCIAL-BANKS; INVESTMENT; MARKET; FIRMS; PERFORMANCE; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.najef.2014.03.005
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Sections 20 and 32 of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act address a potential conflict of interest by banning commercial banks from the market for corporate securities underwriting. This restriction was officially rescinded in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act. In turn, this development has piqued the interest of scholars and renewed the debate on the role that commercial banks play, as well as the consequences of this role in equity offerings, which may either result in conflict of interest or certification. In this study, we comprehensively examine whether conflict of interest or certification more accurately characterizes the underwriting of seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) by lending-relationship banks. Overall, the results suggest that the presence of lending-relationship banks lowers the gross spreads and underpricing of SEOs. Furthermore, our evidence shows that SEOs led by lending-relationship banks exhibit better long-run performance than other SEOs, which supports the certification hypothesis. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:327 / 346
页数:20
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   THE UNDERWRITING EXPERIENCE OF COMMERCIAL BANK AFFILIATES PRIOR TO THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT - A REEXAMINATION OF EVIDENCE FOR PASSAGE OF THE ACT [J].
ANG, JS ;
RICHARDSON, T .
JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 1994, 18 (02) :351-395
[2]   EQUITY ISSUES AND OFFERING DILUTION [J].
ASQUITH, P ;
MULLINS, DW .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1986, 15 (1-2) :61-89
[3]   Project financing, entrepreneurial activity, and investment in the presence of asymmetric information [J].
Batabyal, Amitrajeet A. .
NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, 2012, 23 (01) :115-122
[4]   Conflict of interest and certification in the US IPO market [J].
Benzoni, Luca ;
Schenone, Carola .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL INTERMEDIATION, 2010, 19 (02) :235-254
[5]   Does it pay to be loyal? An empirical analysis of underwriting relationships and fees [J].
Burch, TR ;
Nanda, V ;
Warther, V .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 2005, 77 (03) :673-699
[6]   INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERINGS AND UNDERWRITER REPUTATION [J].
CARTER, R ;
MANASTER, S .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 1990, 45 (04) :1045-1067
[7]   Underwriter reputation, initial returns, and the long-run performance of IPO stocks [J].
Carter, RB ;
Dark, FH ;
Singh, AK .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 1998, 53 (01) :285-311
[8]   Does bank relationship matter for corporate risk-taking? Evidence from listed firms in Taiwan [J].
Chan, Chia-Chung ;
Lin, Bing-Huei ;
Chang, Yung-Ho ;
Liao, Wei-Chen .
NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, 2013, 26 :323-338
[9]   Great expectations: Banks as equity underwriters [J].
Chaplinsky, Susan ;
Erwin, Gayle R. .
JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 2009, 33 (02) :380-389
[10]   INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND THE MARKET REACTION TO EQUITY OFFERINGS [J].
DENIS, DJ .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS, 1994, 29 (02) :159-177