مروری بر تحقیقات صورت گرفته IPO در آسیا: گام بعدی چیست؟

This paper examines the current status of research on IPOs in general, with special focus on Asian IPOs. As in the case of U.S. IPOs, most past studies on Asian IPOs deal with the issue of under-pricing in IPOs and the factors, usually unique to Asian IPOs, that can explain the levels of the IPO under-pricing. Studies on long-term IPO performances are also carried out with results not always consistent with long-term underperformance observed in the U.S. In general, research on Asian IPOs is still quite preliminary with many IPO phenomena discovered in the U.S. are not fully investigated. This paper also suggests some possible areas of IPO research in the future.

In general, the IPO literature documents that there are positive initial returns (usually measured as percentage change from offer price of IPO to the closing price on the first day of trading) both in the U.S. and international markets. This gives rise to a phenomenon referred to as the IPO puzzle or specifically the under-pricing of IPOs puzzle. When after-market returns (usually for a period that varies from 1 month to 5 years) are measured, the abnormal returns generally become insignificant or negative. The short-run and long-run performances of IPOs are also the most frequently research topic on Asian IPOs. This paper is designed to review the status of research in Asian IPOs, with specific focus on short-term under-pricing and long-run performance of IPOs. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the short-term under-pricing of Asian IPOs, while Section 3 discusses the after-market and long-term performances of Asian IPOs. Section 4 presents the explanations for the under-pricing phenomenon. Section 5 continues with explanations for the long-term under-performance. Section 6 discusses issues relevant to Asian IPOs. Section 7 touches on other relevant issues. Section 8 concludes the paper, and suggests future areas of research on Asian IPOs.

I believe that there are still many unresolved issues remaining. For the start, no research has addressed the issue regarding the right time to issue an IPO. Pagano et al. (1998) report that there is no any model that can fully explain at what stage of a firm's lifecycle it is optimal to go public or issue IPO. The number of companies going public also varies dramatically from country to country, and from one period to another. What is the effect of the number of IPOs on the under-pricing of IPO in each country? As mentioned by Pagano et al. (1998), there is no model that can explain why the volume of IPOs varies dramatically across time and across countries. In general, it can be observed that the volume of IPOs varies with overall market trend in most countries; when share prices rise, the number of IPOs also rises. Furthermore, market conditions can also be viewed as a function of the relative costs of debt versus equity and the relative costs of private versus public placement. What are the influence, if any, the differences in Asian laws and their enforcement, and culture on the performance of Asian IPOs? Loughran et al. (1994) conclude that, in all 25 countries (including 7 Asian countries) for which data is available, the average initial returns tend to be higher the greater is the degree of government interference. Related to this issue is the study on the effect of the structural change in the IPO pricing mechanism on the IPO under-pricing. In Japan, Pettway and Kaneko (1996), for example, study the effects of removing price limits and introducing auctions upon short-term returns of Japanese IPOs. They find that changes that remove price limits and introduce public auctions reduce the level of initial returns significantly; this means that public policy can reduce the levels of under-pricing of IPOs. In Korea, Kim et al. (1995b) find that the market price of an IPO is significantly affected by financial variables (such as earnings per share, offer size, industry-type prospects, and offer type), and it is more closely associated with these financial variables after the 1988 liberalization of Korean IPO pricing than it was before the liberalization. In early 1996, the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong allowed firms focusing on infrastructure projects to issue IPOs under a relaxed set of listing requirements, allowing them to go public with a shorter operating history or lower profitability levels. Dewenter and Field (2001) report that these firms are no more speculative than other IPO firms, and they are usually taken public by reputable investment banks. In Malaysia, Saadouni et al. (2005) report that the change in regulation towards a market-based pricing mechanism in 1996 has an adverse effect on under-pricing; IPOs listed before the change in regulatory environment are significantly less under-priced than those listed after the change. In general, this area of research is still lacking in Asia, and I truly believe that it is a research area worth looking into. In Korea, Kim et al. (1995b) find that the market price of an IPO is significantly affected by financial variables (such as earnings per share, offer size, industry-type prospects, and offer type), and it is more closely associated with these financial variables after the 1988 liberalization of Korean IPO pricing than it was before the liberalization. In early 1996, the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong allowed firms focusing on infrastructure projects to issue IPOs under a relaxed set of listing requirements, allowing them to go public with a shorter operating history or lower profitability levels. Dewenter and Field (2001) report that these firms are no more speculative than other IPO firms, and they are usually taken public by reputable investment banks. In Malaysia, Saadouni et al. (2005) report that the change in regulation towards a market-based pricing mechanism in 1996 has an adverse effect on under-pricing; IPOs listed before the change in regulatory environment are significantly less under-priced than those listed after the change. The marketing of IPOs is another area of research that needs serious attention from researchers in Asia. In the U.S., Cook et al. (2006), using data for a sample of IPOs from 1993 through 2000, find that investment bankers have an incentive to promote an IPO to induce sentiment investors (noise traders) into the market for it. They also find that the promotional efforts of investment bankers influence the compensation of investment bankers, the valuation of an IPO, its initial returns and trading, the wealth gains of insider shareholders, and the likelihood that an issuer switches investment bankers for a subsequent seasoned equity offering. What is the effect of IPO size on its initial return or under-pricing? What is the optimum size for each sector of the market? These are still unanswered questions in Asian IPOs. Finally, research related to market microstructure during the post-listing of IPOs can still be carried out in Asia. IPO volatility during the post-listing can also be studied.