Do Corporate Governance Motives Drive Hedge Funds and Private Equity Activities?

A. Achleitner, A. Betzer, Jasmin Gider
{"title":"Do Corporate Governance Motives Drive Hedge Funds and Private Equity Activities?","authors":"A. Achleitner, A. Betzer, Jasmin Gider","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1292896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We address the question of whether hedge fund and private equity investments in public firms are motivated by corporate governance improvements. As opposed to traditional financial investors both HF and PE are likely to have the incentives to alleviate agency conflicts. However, against the background of differences in their business models and organizational set ups, it remains an empirical question of whether they address the same or different agency conflicts. Studying HF and PE activities in a typical Continental European market like Germany promises to offer interesting insights about how HF and PE activities relate to the prevalence of family ownership, concentrated ownership structures and conflicts among majority and minority owners. We document empirical evidence that both HF and PE investments are driven by corporate governance improvements, but seem to address different types of agency conflicts. Whereas HF focus on firms with a lack of a controlling shareholder, in particular family shareholders, PE invest in firms which exhibit the potential to align manager-shareholder interests due to low managerial ownership. Both appear to address free cash flow problems differently. Aiming at dividend increases, HF tend use commitment devices that can be implemented over a short horizon. In contrast, PE are inclined to target firms which are particularly well-suited for a leverage increase because of low expected financial distress costs. This strategy requires a sufficiently long investment horizon.","PeriodicalId":417524,"journal":{"name":"FEN: Other International Corporate Finance (Topic)","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FEN: Other International Corporate Finance (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1292896","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

We address the question of whether hedge fund and private equity investments in public firms are motivated by corporate governance improvements. As opposed to traditional financial investors both HF and PE are likely to have the incentives to alleviate agency conflicts. However, against the background of differences in their business models and organizational set ups, it remains an empirical question of whether they address the same or different agency conflicts. Studying HF and PE activities in a typical Continental European market like Germany promises to offer interesting insights about how HF and PE activities relate to the prevalence of family ownership, concentrated ownership structures and conflicts among majority and minority owners. We document empirical evidence that both HF and PE investments are driven by corporate governance improvements, but seem to address different types of agency conflicts. Whereas HF focus on firms with a lack of a controlling shareholder, in particular family shareholders, PE invest in firms which exhibit the potential to align manager-shareholder interests due to low managerial ownership. Both appear to address free cash flow problems differently. Aiming at dividend increases, HF tend use commitment devices that can be implemented over a short horizon. In contrast, PE are inclined to target firms which are particularly well-suited for a leverage increase because of low expected financial distress costs. This strategy requires a sufficiently long investment horizon.
公司治理动机驱动对冲基金和私募股权活动吗?
我们探讨了对冲基金和私募股权对上市公司的投资是否受到公司治理改善的激励。与传统的金融投资者不同,私募股权基金和私募股权基金可能都有缓解代理冲突的动机。然而,在商业模式和组织结构不同的背景下,它们解决的代理冲突是相同的还是不同的,这仍然是一个实证问题。在典型的欧洲大陆市场(如德国)研究高频和体育活动,有望提供有趣的见解,了解高频和体育活动与家族所有权的盛行、集中的所有权结构以及多数和少数所有者之间的冲突之间的关系。我们记录了经验证据,证明高频基金和私募股权投资都是由公司治理改进驱动的,但似乎解决了不同类型的代理冲突。私募股权基金关注的是缺乏控股股东(尤其是家族股东)的公司,而私募股权基金则投资于那些由于管理层持股率低而表现出经理人与股东利益一致潜力的公司。两家公司处理自由现金流问题的方式似乎有所不同。以增加股息为目标,高频基金倾向于使用可在短期内实施的承诺装置。相比之下,私募股权公司倾向于瞄准那些由于预期财务困境成本较低而特别适合增加杠杆的公司。这一策略需要足够长的投资期限。
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