双层保险:家庭事务

Ronald C. Anderson, Ezgi Ottolenghi, D. Reeb
{"title":"双层保险:家庭事务","authors":"Ronald C. Anderson, Ezgi Ottolenghi, D. Reeb","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3006669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Critics advocate eliminating dual class shares. We find that founding families control 89% of dual class firms, potentially confounding economic inferences regarding these structures. Using industry, market and Fama-French excess returns, we find a buy-and-hold strategy of dual class family firms, annually makes an additional 350 basis points over the benchmark. Institutional owners garner a disparate portion of these excess returns by holding over 87% of their floated shares. These investors demand a premium for holding dual-class family firms, suggesting a market-driven resolution to concerns about limited voting shares. In contrast, non-family dual class firms possess high stock valuations and insignificant excess returns. Overall, our analysis suggests that investors exhibit substantial concerns over family control rather than dual class structures.","PeriodicalId":10698,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Dual Class Premium: A Family Affair\",\"authors\":\"Ronald C. Anderson, Ezgi Ottolenghi, D. Reeb\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3006669\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Critics advocate eliminating dual class shares. We find that founding families control 89% of dual class firms, potentially confounding economic inferences regarding these structures. Using industry, market and Fama-French excess returns, we find a buy-and-hold strategy of dual class family firms, annually makes an additional 350 basis points over the benchmark. Institutional owners garner a disparate portion of these excess returns by holding over 87% of their floated shares. These investors demand a premium for holding dual-class family firms, suggesting a market-driven resolution to concerns about limited voting shares. In contrast, non-family dual class firms possess high stock valuations and insignificant excess returns. Overall, our analysis suggests that investors exhibit substantial concerns over family control rather than dual class structures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3006669\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3006669","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

批评者主张取消双重股权。我们发现,创始家族控制着89%的双重股权结构公司,这可能会混淆有关这些结构的经济推论。利用行业、市场和Fama-French超额回报,我们发现双层家族企业的买入并持有策略每年比基准高出350个基点。机构股东通过持有超过87%的流通股,获得了这些超额回报的不同部分。这些投资者要求持有双重股权结构的家族企业获得溢价,这表明市场驱动解决了对有限投票权股份的担忧。相比之下,非家族双重股权结构公司具有较高的股票估值和不显著的超额收益。总体而言,我们的分析表明,投资者对家族控制而非双重阶级结构表现出了极大的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Dual Class Premium: A Family Affair
Critics advocate eliminating dual class shares. We find that founding families control 89% of dual class firms, potentially confounding economic inferences regarding these structures. Using industry, market and Fama-French excess returns, we find a buy-and-hold strategy of dual class family firms, annually makes an additional 350 basis points over the benchmark. Institutional owners garner a disparate portion of these excess returns by holding over 87% of their floated shares. These investors demand a premium for holding dual-class family firms, suggesting a market-driven resolution to concerns about limited voting shares. In contrast, non-family dual class firms possess high stock valuations and insignificant excess returns. Overall, our analysis suggests that investors exhibit substantial concerns over family control rather than dual class structures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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