融资约束、支付方式与并购绩效
|
摘要
以我国上市公司2009~2011年发生的并购事件为研究对象,运用Logit回归模型构建的融资约束指数,实证检验了融资约束对主并公司支付方式选择的影响;采用事件研究法检验不同支付方式的并购绩效差异;考察了融资约束与支付方式选择对并购绩效影响的交互效应。研究结果表明:相比非融资约束的主并公司,存在融资约束的主并公司更倾向于使用股票支付方式;使用股票支付获得累计超常收益显著为正,且显著大于现金支付获得的累计超常收益。对样本按融资约束分组的进一步检验结果表明,上述结论仅对融资约束公司成立,非融资约束公司不同支付方式下的超常收益并无显著差异。研究结论意味着,融资约束的主并公司在支付方式选择时并不遵循优序融资理论,留存有限的现金资源而选择股票支付是为并购后实现投资机会而保持融资灵活性的理性行为。
This paper takes the domestic M&A events initiated by the listed companies from 2009 to 2011 as the study sample.Firstly, it empirically tests the effect of acquirers' financial constraint on their payment choices using financial constraint index created by Logit model, and the acquirers' M&A performance of the different payments using event studying method. Moreover, the interacted effect of financial constraint and the payment methods on M&A performance is tested. The results indicate that, financially constrained acquirers are more likely to use stock in acquisitions; The CAR of stock payments is positive and significant, and also greater than cash payments. Further test of the subsample according to the financial constraint, the results show that this conclusion is only established in financially constrained acquirers, and there is no significant difference in different payment choices of unconstrained acquirers. The findings complements that the pecking order of capital structure is violated for the payments choice of constrained acquirers,and it is rational for them offering stock to maintain financial flexibility for future investments after the acquisition.
This paper takes the domestic M&A events initiated by the listed companies from 2009 to 2011 as the study sample.Firstly, it empirically tests the effect of acquirers' financial constraint on their payment choices using financial constraint index created by Logit model, and the acquirers' M&A performance of the different payments using event studying method. Moreover, the interacted effect of financial constraint and the payment methods on M&A performance is tested. The results indicate that, financially constrained acquirers are more likely to use stock in acquisitions; The CAR of stock payments is positive and significant, and also greater than cash payments. Further test of the subsample according to the financial constraint, the results show that this conclusion is only established in financially constrained acquirers, and there is no significant difference in different payment choices of unconstrained acquirers. The findings complements that the pecking order of capital structure is violated for the payments choice of constrained acquirers,and it is rational for them offering stock to maintain financial flexibility for future investments after the acquisition.
引文
[1]Fazzari S,Hubbard R G,Petersen B C.Financing Constraints and Corporate Investment[J].Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1988(1):141-195.
[2]Hubbard R G,Palia D.Are-examination of the Conglomerate Merger Wave in the 1960s:An Internal Capital Markets View[R].National Bureau of Economic Research,1998.
[3]Degryse H,De Jong A.Investment Spending in the Netherlands:Asymmetric Information or Managerial Discretion[M].Kath.Univ.,Department Economie,Center for Economic Studies,2001.
[4]Gelos R G,Werner A M.Financial Liberalization,Credit Constraints,and Collateral:Investment in the Mexican Manufacturing Sector[J].Journal of Development Economics,2002,67(1):1-27.
[5]Kaplan S N,L Zingales.Do Investment-cash Flow Sensitivities Provide Useful Measures of Financing Constraints[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997.112(1):169-215.
[6]Moyen N.Investment-cash Flow Sensitivities:Constrained Versus Unconstrained Firms[J].The Journal of Finance,2004,59(5):2061-2092.
[7]Cleary S,Povel P,Raith M.The U-shaped Investment Curve:Theory and Evidence[J].Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,2007,42(1):1-40.
[8]冯巍.内部现金流量和企业投资——来自我国股票市场上市公司财务报告的证据[J].经济科学,1999(1):51-57.
[9]郑江淮,何旭强,王华.上市公司投资的融资约束:从股权结构角度的实证分析[J].金融研究,2001,11(1):92-99.
[10]屈文洲,谢雅璐,叶玉妹.信息不对称,融资约束与投资一现金流敏感性——基于市场微观结构理论的实证研究[J].经济研究,2011(6):105-117.
[11]Almeida H,Campello M,Weisbach M.The Cash Flow Sensitivity of Cash[J].Journal of Finance.2004(59):1777-1804.
[12]Denis D J,Sibilkov V.Financial Constraints,Investment,and the Value of Cash Holdings[J].Review of Financial Studies,2010,23(1):247-269.
[13]章晓霞,吴冲锋.融资约束影响我国上市公司的现金持有政策吗——来自现金-现金流敏感度的分析[J].管理评论,2006(10):59-62.
[14]李金,李仕明,严整.融资约束与现金—现金流敏感度——来自国内A股上市公司的经验证据[J].管理评论,2007(3):53-57.
[15]连玉君,苏治,丁志国.现金-现金流敏感性能检验融资约束假说吗?[J].统计研究,2008(10):92-99.
[16]Mara Faccio,Ronald W,Masulis.The Choice of Payment Method in European Mergers and Acquisitions[J].The Journal of Finance,2005,60(3):1345-1388.
[17]Alshwer A,Sibilkov V,Zaiats N.Financial Constraints and the Method of Payment in Mergers and Acquisitions[R].Working Paper SSRN,2011,136455.
[18]Karampatsas N,Petmezas D,Travlos N.Credit Ratings and the Choice of Payment Method in Mergers and Acquisitions[R].Working Paper SSRN,2013,2203536.
[19]Di Giuli A.The Effect of Stock Misvaluation and Investment Opportunities on the Method of Payment in Mergers[R].Working Paper SSRN,2012,1752332.
[20]杨志海,赵立彬.融资约束,支付方式与并购绩效的关系研究[J].证券市场导报,2012(5):36-40.
[21]Travlos N G.Corporate Takeover Bids,Methods of Payment,and Bidding Firms'Stock Returns[J].The Journal of Finance,1987,42(4):943-963.
[22]Wansley J W,Lane W R,Yang H C.Gains to Bidder Firms in Cash and Securities Transactions[J].Financial Review,1987,22(4):403-414.
[23]Andrade,Gregor,Mark Mitchell,Erik Stafford.New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers[J].Journal of Economic Perspectures,2001(15):103-120.
[24]Moeller S B,Schlingemann F P,Stulz R M.Do Shareholders of Acquiring Firms Gain from Acquisitions[R].National Bureau of Economic Research,2003.
[25]Draper P,Paudyal K.Acquisitions:Private Versus Public[J].European Financial Management,2006,12(1):57-80.
[26]Martynova M,Renneboog L.A Century of Corporate Takeovers:What Have We Learned and Where do We Stand?[J].Journal of Banking&Finance,2008,32(10):2148-2177.
[27]Martynova,Marina,Renneboog.The Performance of the European Market for Corporate Control:Evidence from the Fifth Takeover Wave[J].European Financial Management,2011(17):208-259.
[28]杜兴强,聂志萍.中国上市公司并购的短期财富效应实证研究[J].证券市场导报,2007(1):29-38.
[29]Chang S.Takeovers of Privately Held Targets,Methods of Payment,and Bidder Returns[J].Journal of Finance,1998,53(2):773-784.
[30]Fuller K,J Netter,M Stegemoller.What do Returns to Acquiring Firms Tell us?Evidence from Firms that Make Many Acquisitions[J].Journal of Finance 2002(57):1763-1793.
①本文将融资约束程度高的公司视为融资约束公司,将融资约束程度低的公司视为非融资约束公司。
②通过对CSMAR中国上市公司并购重组研究数据库中的卖方公司上市情况进行筛选,发现在构成研究样本的642个并购事件中,目标公司为上市公司的并购样本为15个,仅占全样本的2.34%。
③变量选择借鉴Faccio and Masulis(2005)以及Alshwer and Sibilkov(2011)对并购支付方式选择的影响因素的变量选取。
④如果同一家上市公司在同一天宣告两笔或者两笔以上相同并购标的的并购交易,则将这些交易合并为一起事件。
⑤此标准参考了刘淑莲、张广宝和耿琳(2012)的筛选标准,因为随着交易规模的增加,支付方式选择趋于多样化,而金额较小的并购对收购公司没有实质性影响,对本文的研究而言可能是一种噪音。
⑥根据CSMAR中国上市公司并购重组研究数据库关于并购对价方式的分类标准进行统计后发现,1998~2006年的股票对价并购为64起,2007~2011年的股票对价并购升至1 033起。
⑦并购前一年末主并公司融资缺口DEFt=DIVt+Xt+ΔWt+Rt-Ct,如果DEF>0,则主并公司为融资约束公司,Constraint=1 ;否则为非融资约束公司,Constraint=0。其中,DEFt为融资缺口;DIVt为公司支付的现金股利;Xt为资本性支出;ΔWt为营运资本净增加额;Rt为一年内到期的长期负债;Ct为息税后经营现金流净额。
[2]Hubbard R G,Palia D.Are-examination of the Conglomerate Merger Wave in the 1960s:An Internal Capital Markets View[R].National Bureau of Economic Research,1998.
[3]Degryse H,De Jong A.Investment Spending in the Netherlands:Asymmetric Information or Managerial Discretion[M].Kath.Univ.,Department Economie,Center for Economic Studies,2001.
[4]Gelos R G,Werner A M.Financial Liberalization,Credit Constraints,and Collateral:Investment in the Mexican Manufacturing Sector[J].Journal of Development Economics,2002,67(1):1-27.
[5]Kaplan S N,L Zingales.Do Investment-cash Flow Sensitivities Provide Useful Measures of Financing Constraints[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997.112(1):169-215.
[6]Moyen N.Investment-cash Flow Sensitivities:Constrained Versus Unconstrained Firms[J].The Journal of Finance,2004,59(5):2061-2092.
[7]Cleary S,Povel P,Raith M.The U-shaped Investment Curve:Theory and Evidence[J].Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,2007,42(1):1-40.
[8]冯巍.内部现金流量和企业投资——来自我国股票市场上市公司财务报告的证据[J].经济科学,1999(1):51-57.
[9]郑江淮,何旭强,王华.上市公司投资的融资约束:从股权结构角度的实证分析[J].金融研究,2001,11(1):92-99.
[10]屈文洲,谢雅璐,叶玉妹.信息不对称,融资约束与投资一现金流敏感性——基于市场微观结构理论的实证研究[J].经济研究,2011(6):105-117.
[11]Almeida H,Campello M,Weisbach M.The Cash Flow Sensitivity of Cash[J].Journal of Finance.2004(59):1777-1804.
[12]Denis D J,Sibilkov V.Financial Constraints,Investment,and the Value of Cash Holdings[J].Review of Financial Studies,2010,23(1):247-269.
[13]章晓霞,吴冲锋.融资约束影响我国上市公司的现金持有政策吗——来自现金-现金流敏感度的分析[J].管理评论,2006(10):59-62.
[14]李金,李仕明,严整.融资约束与现金—现金流敏感度——来自国内A股上市公司的经验证据[J].管理评论,2007(3):53-57.
[15]连玉君,苏治,丁志国.现金-现金流敏感性能检验融资约束假说吗?[J].统计研究,2008(10):92-99.
[16]Mara Faccio,Ronald W,Masulis.The Choice of Payment Method in European Mergers and Acquisitions[J].The Journal of Finance,2005,60(3):1345-1388.
[17]Alshwer A,Sibilkov V,Zaiats N.Financial Constraints and the Method of Payment in Mergers and Acquisitions[R].Working Paper SSRN,2011,136455.
[18]Karampatsas N,Petmezas D,Travlos N.Credit Ratings and the Choice of Payment Method in Mergers and Acquisitions[R].Working Paper SSRN,2013,2203536.
[19]Di Giuli A.The Effect of Stock Misvaluation and Investment Opportunities on the Method of Payment in Mergers[R].Working Paper SSRN,2012,1752332.
[20]杨志海,赵立彬.融资约束,支付方式与并购绩效的关系研究[J].证券市场导报,2012(5):36-40.
[21]Travlos N G.Corporate Takeover Bids,Methods of Payment,and Bidding Firms'Stock Returns[J].The Journal of Finance,1987,42(4):943-963.
[22]Wansley J W,Lane W R,Yang H C.Gains to Bidder Firms in Cash and Securities Transactions[J].Financial Review,1987,22(4):403-414.
[23]Andrade,Gregor,Mark Mitchell,Erik Stafford.New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers[J].Journal of Economic Perspectures,2001(15):103-120.
[24]Moeller S B,Schlingemann F P,Stulz R M.Do Shareholders of Acquiring Firms Gain from Acquisitions[R].National Bureau of Economic Research,2003.
[25]Draper P,Paudyal K.Acquisitions:Private Versus Public[J].European Financial Management,2006,12(1):57-80.
[26]Martynova M,Renneboog L.A Century of Corporate Takeovers:What Have We Learned and Where do We Stand?[J].Journal of Banking&Finance,2008,32(10):2148-2177.
[27]Martynova,Marina,Renneboog.The Performance of the European Market for Corporate Control:Evidence from the Fifth Takeover Wave[J].European Financial Management,2011(17):208-259.
[28]杜兴强,聂志萍.中国上市公司并购的短期财富效应实证研究[J].证券市场导报,2007(1):29-38.
[29]Chang S.Takeovers of Privately Held Targets,Methods of Payment,and Bidder Returns[J].Journal of Finance,1998,53(2):773-784.
[30]Fuller K,J Netter,M Stegemoller.What do Returns to Acquiring Firms Tell us?Evidence from Firms that Make Many Acquisitions[J].Journal of Finance 2002(57):1763-1793.
①本文将融资约束程度高的公司视为融资约束公司,将融资约束程度低的公司视为非融资约束公司。
②通过对CSMAR中国上市公司并购重组研究数据库中的卖方公司上市情况进行筛选,发现在构成研究样本的642个并购事件中,目标公司为上市公司的并购样本为15个,仅占全样本的2.34%。
③变量选择借鉴Faccio and Masulis(2005)以及Alshwer and Sibilkov(2011)对并购支付方式选择的影响因素的变量选取。
④如果同一家上市公司在同一天宣告两笔或者两笔以上相同并购标的的并购交易,则将这些交易合并为一起事件。
⑤此标准参考了刘淑莲、张广宝和耿琳(2012)的筛选标准,因为随着交易规模的增加,支付方式选择趋于多样化,而金额较小的并购对收购公司没有实质性影响,对本文的研究而言可能是一种噪音。
⑥根据CSMAR中国上市公司并购重组研究数据库关于并购对价方式的分类标准进行统计后发现,1998~2006年的股票对价并购为64起,2007~2011年的股票对价并购升至1 033起。
⑦并购前一年末主并公司融资缺口DEFt=DIVt+Xt+ΔWt+Rt-Ct,如果DEF>0,则主并公司为融资约束公司,Constraint=1 ;否则为非融资约束公司,Constraint=0。其中,DEFt为融资缺口;DIVt为公司支付的现金股利;Xt为资本性支出;ΔWt为营运资本净增加额;Rt为一年内到期的长期负债;Ct为息税后经营现金流净额。