The Value of Blockholder Liquidity and the Decision to Unify Share Classes

Jason W. Howell
{"title":"The Value of Blockholder Liquidity and the Decision to Unify Share Classes","authors":"Jason W. Howell","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1571760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From 1988 to 2007, over 1,100 publicly traded firms used the dual class structure. Despite the structure's effectiveness at maintaining control, approximately one fourth of these firms eliminated the dual class structure. In 95 firms, superior shareholders voluntarily eliminated the dual class structure by means of a share conversion or shareholder proposal. On average, blockholders lost half of their voting power during the year of the unification (from 51.4% to 26.0%). In this study, I examine the firms who voluntarily unify their share classes in order to determine why blockholders willingly give up such large stakes in voting power. I find 70% of unifying firms specifically state \"increase liquidity\" as a primary reason for unifying their share classes. Also, I find blockholders maintain or slightly increase their voting power prior to the uni cation, but then dramatically decrease their voting power in the three years after the unification. I find two-thirds of the drop in voting power is attributable to reductions in blockholder holdings rather than share dilutions. In addition, I find over 40% of blockholders completely exit the firm within three years. Based on the empirical evidence, I conclude blockholders are willing to lose signi cant portions of voting power in order to increase their own personal liquidity.","PeriodicalId":329558,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Finance 2","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Finance 2","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1571760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

From 1988 to 2007, over 1,100 publicly traded firms used the dual class structure. Despite the structure's effectiveness at maintaining control, approximately one fourth of these firms eliminated the dual class structure. In 95 firms, superior shareholders voluntarily eliminated the dual class structure by means of a share conversion or shareholder proposal. On average, blockholders lost half of their voting power during the year of the unification (from 51.4% to 26.0%). In this study, I examine the firms who voluntarily unify their share classes in order to determine why blockholders willingly give up such large stakes in voting power. I find 70% of unifying firms specifically state "increase liquidity" as a primary reason for unifying their share classes. Also, I find blockholders maintain or slightly increase their voting power prior to the uni cation, but then dramatically decrease their voting power in the three years after the unification. I find two-thirds of the drop in voting power is attributable to reductions in blockholder holdings rather than share dilutions. In addition, I find over 40% of blockholders completely exit the firm within three years. Based on the empirical evidence, I conclude blockholders are willing to lose signi cant portions of voting power in order to increase their own personal liquidity.
大股东流动性价值与股票类别统一决策
从1988年到2007年,超过1100家上市公司采用了双重股权结构。尽管这种结构有效地维持了控制权,但这些公司中约有四分之一取消了双重股权结构。在95家公司中,优势股东通过股份转换或股东提案自愿消除了双重股权结构。平均而言,在统一的一年中,大股东失去了一半的投票权(从51.4%降至26.0%)。在本研究中,我考察了自愿统一其股票类别的公司,以确定为什么大股东愿意放弃如此大的投票权股份。我发现70%的统一公司明确表示“增加流动性”是统一其股票类别的主要原因。此外,我发现区块持有者在统一之前保持或略微增加了他们的投票权,但在统一后的三年内,他们的投票权急剧减少。我发现,投票权下降的三分之二是由于大股东持股减少,而不是股份稀释。此外,我发现超过40%的大股东在三年内完全退出了公司。根据经验证据,我得出结论,大股东愿意失去很大一部分投票权,以增加他们自己的个人流动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信