• The Korean Journal of Financial Studies
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.93-122
• /
• 1998

본 연구는 1988년부터 1990년까지 공개한 249개 제조업을 대상으로 기업공개를 전후하여 사기업이 공개기업으로 전환하는 과정에서의 변화를 분석하였다. 즉, 공개 전후의 재무적 특성, 영업성과, 소유구조, 배당정책의 변화를 분석하였다. 또한 상장 후 장기주가행태를 살펴보고 영업성과와의 관련성도 분석하였다. 249개 공개기업 중 상장 3년 후에는 오직 71%의 기업만이 정상적인 영업을 할 정도로 영업성과는 악화되었다. 상장년도의 총자산영업이익률과 자기자본순이익률은 기업공개와 함께 급감하며 이후에도 계속 하락하였다. 부채비율은 상장년도에 크게 감소하나 이후 점진적으로 증가하여 5년 후에는 상장 1년 전의 수준으로 증가하였다. 대주주 1인 지분율은 공개 이후 점진적으로 하락하며 지분을 변화는 상장직전의 지분을, 신주모집비율, 자본금 증가와 부의 관계를 갖는다. 공개 전에 배당성향은 매우 낮고 현금배당을 지급한 기업수가 작으나, 상장 이후에는 배당성향이 증가하고 차등배당을 실시하는 기업의 수가 증가하였다. 또한 공개 전에 대주주에게 과도한 배당금을 지급한다는 증거는 없었다. 상장 후 60개월의 누적평균초과수익률은 -15%이며, 산업별로 큰 차이가 나타난다. 기간별 누적초과수익률은 기간별 영업성과의 변화와 정의 유의적인 관계를 갖는 것으로 나타났다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.203-229
• /
• 1997

공개전 대규모 무상증자에 대한 시각은 기업가들이 공개전에 물타기증자를 하여 상장함으로써 과대한 자본이득을 취한다는 것이다. 본 연구는 1988년부터 1990년까지 공개한 282개 기업을 대상으로 공개전 무상증자를 실시한 기업의 특성과 영향을 분석하였다. 공개전 대규모 무상증자를 실시한 기업들의 공개전 주당순이익은 무상증자를 전혀 실시하지 않은 기업의 주당순이익의 3.3배로 높아, 주당순이익을 같은 시기에 공개하는 기업의 수준으로 낮추기 위하여 무상증자를 실시하는 것으로 사료된다. 또한 무상증자비율은 초과수익률과 유의적인 관계를 갖지 않으며, 내부자거래자료를 분석한 결과 특별한 사항을 발견할 수 없었다. 공개후 장기초과수익률 분석에서 발견된 장기 저성과 현상은 금융기관을 제외한 모든 제조업 공개기업에 공통된 현상으로 장기 저성과와 무상증자비율은 유의적인 관계를 갖지 않으며, 장기 저성과 현상은 공개기업들이 영업성과가 최정점에 있을 때 기업을 공개하고 이후 영업실적이 악화됨에 따라 천천히 주가에 반영되는 것으로 이해된다. 본 연구는 대규모 무상증자를 실시한 이유를 제시하고 있으며, 대규모 무상종자가 상장후의 주가에 전혀 영향을 주지 않는다는 것을 발견하였다. 따라서 공개전 무상증자를 결코 나쁜 시각으로만 볼 수 없다고 사료된다.

• Information Systems Review
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.51-67
• /
• 2019

This study examines IPO underpricing and its interaction with investor attention as one of key factors that can affect post-IPO performance in the short- and long-run. With higher investor attention measured as Google searches around IPO dates, our empirical results show that IT firms are underpriced more severely than non-IT firms. We also demonstrate that investor attention is positively associated with IPO performance in the short-run for both IT and non-IT firms. However, the impact of investor attention is more sustained for IT firms over a longer time horizon when coupled with a high level of underpricing while its impact is neutralized for non-IT firms. Given the unique attributes such as network effects embedded in the IT industry, our findings suggest that IPO underpricing and its interplay with investor attention for IT firms play an important role in shaping long-run performance and ultimately affecting fundamental value.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.253-271
• /
• 1997

본 연구는 1988년부터 1994년까지 우리나라 주식시장에 상장된 IPO 주식의 장단기 성과를 분석하고, IPO 기업들의 상장 후 영업성과를 상장 이전의 영업성과와 비교하는 데 그 목적이 있다. 본 연구의 특징은 가격제한폭 제도가 상장 후 IPO 주가에 미치는 영향을 고려한 점에 있다고 할 수 있으며, 실증분석 결과 다음과 같은 사실들을 발견하였다. 단기적으로 볼 때, IPO 주식의 비정상 최초수익률은 가격제한폭을 고려하여 측정하는 경우에 훨씬 더 높게 나타나며 또한 상승시장의 경우에 더 높게 나타난다. IPO 주식은 상장 이후에도 추가적인 초과수익을 올리며, 상장 직후에 과잉반응 현상을 동반한다. 장기적으로 볼 때, IPO 주식의 수익률은 시장 평균수익률에 미치지 못한다. IPO 기업들의 영업성과가 상장 이후에 현저히 악화되는 것으로 나타난다. 이는 IPO 기업들이 공개모집을 하는 과정에서 기업내용을 과대포장(window-dressing)하는 증거라고 볼 수 있다.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.99-110
• /
• 1991

본 논문은 최근 미국에서 성행되고 있는 기업합병(企業合倂)과 기업비공개화(企業非公開化)와 같은 기업재구성(企業再構成)의 동기를 대리인(代理人) 문제(間題)의 관점에서 설명하는데 그 목적이 있다. 기업합병의 경우, 취득기업의 내부자지분율(內部者持分率)이 높을수록 주주의 부(富)는 합병을 통해 증가하는 반면 내부자지분율이 낮은 기업은 합병을 통해 기존 주주의 부(富)는 오히려 감소한다. 이러한 현상은 소유경영자지분(所有經營者持分)이 낮을 수록 대리인비용이 크게 발생한다는 이론과 일관성(一貫性)이 있음을 알 수 있다. 또한 피취득기업의 주식가격은 합병정보가 공시 되기 이전 몇개월동안 크게 하락하였으나 합병 공시와 동시에 크게 상승하는 현상을 나타낸다. 그 이유는 대리인문제(代理人問題)로 설명 할 수 있다. 피취득기업의 경영자는 기업자원을 비효율적으로 운용할 것(지분(持分)의 대리인비용(代理人費用))이므로 합병공시전 주가는 하락하지만, 합병공시후에는 이러한 대리인문제가 개선될 것이므로 주가가 상승한다는 것이다. 따라서 합병의 경우, 취득기업과 비취득기업 모두 대리인문제(代理人問題)와 관련을 갖는다. 또한 1980년 이후 공개기업(公開企業)의 경영자가 자기회사 주식을 매입한 후 비공개기업(非公開企業으)로 환원(還元)다하는 현상이 유행하고 있다. 비공개기업으로 환원한 기업의 경영자는 창의적 기업활동을 통하여 기업가치를 증대시킨 후 다시 발행시장에서 신주를 발행하여 상당한 이익을 얻고 있다. 이는 공개기업으로 존속하는 경우 낮은 내부자지분율로 인해 대리인문제가 발생하므로 비공개 기업으로 전환함으로써 대리인 비용을 자기주식 취득을 통해 절감시킬 수 있는 증거로 간주된다.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.15-30
• /
• 2019

This study investigates the effects of venture capital investment and corporate venture capital investment on the performance of IPOs listed on KOSDAQ between 2000 and 2014. We classified venture firms with venture capital-backed companies and non-venture capital-backed companies, having the former of which further divided into corporate venture capital-backed companies and independent venture capital-backed companies. The time window of the analysis was set to between 2 years before and 3 years after IPO. Main results of this study reveal that there is little difference between venture capital-backed companies and non-venture capital-backed companies in terms of profitability before and after going public. However, we found out that after IPO venture capital-backed companies display higher ROA than independent venture capital-backed companies or non-venture capital-backed companies, suggesting that corporate venture capital-backed companies might be more advantageous in growing a venture capital ecosystem in Korea.

• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.551-581
• /
• 2009

This case study explores the stock sale, the resulting governance structures, and the airport management and development in Beijing Capital International Airport and Shanghai International Airport at Pudong. It is imperative for Incheon International Airport Corporation (IIAC) to change the management paradigm to survive in the changing environment and to become hubs in the relevant regions. And IIAC needs to search for the new ownership and governance structure to cope with the internal and external demands for innovation. In this study, along with the recent trends of the global airport industry, we suggest the implications for the IIAC's major decisions, especially, for the stock sale, the resulting governance structure, and the airport development and management. It is suggested that Korean government retain the majority control in the process of privatization to keep IIAC as a government-owned enterprise to provide the public goods to the citizen. Furthermore, to maximize the value of stock sale, IIAC needs to decide strategically the time and speed in the hybrid form of stock selling using trade sale and IPOs.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.85-95
• /
• 2016

Generally a venture capital aims at investment and support Venture businesses that signifies a start-up which has high technologies but frailty of the economy so that raise fund from financial agencies at high risk rate, it has high risk but when the venture businesses launch into general orbit, the venture capital guarantee high-rate profits. Venture capital do not just provide risk capital but also takes a role as a mentor for continuous growth with total consulting service at business and technical management. Also it offers in-depth support to reform the supported enterprise in order to enhance the competitive. Venture capital receives attention for years as a principal agent to be promoted strategically at national level. Bio venture, a major concern of venture capital and one of core industries in Korea, is different from other industries because it needs long-term and large scale of investment. these factors bring about difficulties in an investment and growth. Therefore, it is very important to identify growth and profitability of start-ups and small and venture businesses with long-term appreciation above all other industries. This research analyze management results of bio venture businesses empirically by investment from venture capital. according to the results, bio venture businesses need huge capital and a long gap of time, henceforth, formation of model for growth is necessary with angel investing as well as venture capital. Since, there are not many listed bio venture businesses, significant statistical result would be limited. This research studied at only economic focus but further study need to examine a question from various angles.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.51-69
• /
• 2020

Now, it is a stylized fact that a small number of technology firms such as Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook and a few others have become larger and dominant players in an industry. Coupled with the rise of these leading firms, we have also observed that a large number of young firms have become an acquisition target in their early IPO stages. This indeed results in a sharp decline in the number of new entries in public exchanges although a series of policy reforms have been promulgated to foster competition through an increase in new entries. Given the observed industry trend in recent decades, a number of studies have reported increased concentration in most developed countries. However, it is less understood as to what caused an increase in industry concentration. In this paper, we uncover the mechanisms by which industries have become concentrated over the last decades by tracing the changes in industry concentration associated with a firm's status change in its early IPO stages. To this end, we put emphasis on the case in which firms are acquired shortly after they went public. Especially, with the transition to digital-based economies, it is imperative for incumbent firms to adapt and keep pace with new ICT and related intelligent systems. For instance, after the acquisition of a young firm equipped with AI-based solutions, an incumbent firm may better respond to a change in customer taste and preference by integrating acquired AI solutions and analytics skills into multiple business processes. Accordingly, it is not unusual for young ICT firms become an attractive acquisition target. To examine the role of M&As involved with young firms in reshaping the level of industry concentration, we identify a firm's status in early post-IPO stages over the sample periods spanning from 1990 to 2016 as follows: i) being delisted, ii) being standalone firms and iii) being acquired. According to our analysis, firms that have conducted IPO since 2000s have been acquired by incumbent firms at a relatively quicker time than those that did IPO in previous generations. We also show a greater acquisition rate for IPO firms in the ICT sector compared with their counterparts in other sectors. Our results based on multinomial logit models suggest that a large number of IPO firms have been acquired in their early post-IPO lives despite their financial soundness. Specifically, we show that IPO firms are likely to be acquired rather than be delisted due to financial distress in early IPO stages when they are more profitable, more mature or less leveraged. For those IPO firms with venture capital backup have also become an acquisition target more frequently. As a larger number of firms are acquired shortly after their IPO, our results show increased concentration. While providing limited evidence on the impact of large incumbent firms in explaining the change in industry concentration, our results show that the large firms' effect on industry concentration are pronounced in the ICT sector. This result possibly captures the current trend that a few tech giants such as Alphabet, Apple and Facebook continue to increase their market share. In addition, compared with the acquisitions of non-ICT firms, the concentration impact of IPO firms in early stages becomes larger when ICT firms are acquired as a target. Our study makes new contributions. To our best knowledge, this is one of a few studies that link a firm's post-IPO status to associated changes in industry concentration. Although some studies have addressed concentration issues, their primary focus was on market power or proprietary software. Contrast to earlier studies, we are able to uncover the mechanism by which industries have become concentrated by placing emphasis on M&As involving young IPO firms. Interestingly, the concentration impact of IPO firm acquisitions are magnified when a large incumbent firms are involved as an acquirer. This leads us to infer the underlying reasons as to why industries have become more concentrated with a favor of large firms in recent decades. Overall, our study sheds new light on the literature by providing a plausible explanation as to why industries have become concentrated.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.63-101
• /
• 2013

'Venture firms' in Korea are the firms who are certified as 'venture', whose certification types are defined by a law ('Special Law for the Support of Venture Firms'), and therefore encompass not only the venture capital-financed companies, which are usually regarded as ventures in USA and European countries, but also other types of firms such as R&D-intensive firms and the firms with financial guarantee or loans through technology evaluation ('technology finance or loan firms'). This paper examines the differences in the Korean venture firms' growth between the venture certification types. For the empirical analysis, this paper uses the lists of venture-certified firms from 1998 to 2010 which are then linked with their financial data in Korea Enterprises Database (KED). According to the results of empirical analyses, the companies in the 'venture capital-financed firms' type show greater growth rate in sales and the number of regular employees 3 and 5 years after first venture certification than the firms in type of 'technology finance/loan firms'. Moreover, the newly certified companies in 'R&D-intensive firms' type are also showing faster growth than the 'technology finance/loan firms' since 2003 where the venture industry has undergone a consolidation phase after the blast of so-called 'IT venture bubble' in 2001~2002. These results imply that the so-called 'venture firms' in Korea are composed with heterogeneous firm groups with different characteristics and that the companies selected through market mechanism ('venture capital-financed firms') outperforms the companies selected on the basis of policy interests ('technology finance/loan firms') in terms of the growth in sales and employment. On the basis of these findings, this paper suggests that the current venture-support policy should consider the different policy demands of firms across the type of venture certification more actively and that should refocus the objective of policies on facilitating venture capital market rather than emphasizing the nominal increase in the number of venture-certified firms.