Refine
Year of publication
- 2004 (27) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (13)
- Review (4)
- Article (3)
- Book (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Magister's Thesis (1)
- Report (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (27) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (27)
Keywords
- Deutschland (27) (remove)
Institute
Financial theory creates a puzzle. Some authors argue that high-risk entrepreneurs choose debt contracts instead of equity contracts since risky but high returns are of relatively more value for a loan-financed firm. On the contrary, authors who focus explicitly on start-up finance predict that entrepreneurs are the more likely to seek equity-like venture capital contracts, the more risky their projects are. Our paper makes a first step to resolve this puzzle empirically. We present microeconometric evidence on the determinants of debt and equity financing in young and innovative SMEs. We pay special attention to the role of risk for the choice of the financing method. Since risk is not directly observable we use different indicators for financial and project risk. It turns out that our data generally confirms the hypothesis that the probability that a young high-tech firm receives equity financing is an increasing function of the financial risk. With regard to the intrinsic project risk, our results are less conclusive, as some of our indicators of a risky project are found to have a negative effect on the likelihood to be financed by private equity.
This paper aims to analyze the impact of different types of venture capitalists on the performance of their portfolio firms around and after the IPO. We thereby investigate the hypothesis that different governance structures, objectives and track record of different types of VCs have a significant impact on their respective IPOs. We explore this hypothesis by using a data set embracing all IPOs which occurred on Germany's Neuer Markt. Our main finding is that significant differences among the different VCs exist. Firms backed by independent VCs perform significantly better two years after the IPO compared to all other IPOs and their share prices fluctuate less than those of their counterparts in this period of time. Obviously, independent VCs, which concentrated mainly on growth stocks (low book-to-market ratio) and large firms (high market value), were able to add value by leading to less post-IPO idiosyncratic risk and more return (after controlling for all other effects). On the contrary, firms backed by public VCs (being small and having a high book-to-market ratio) showed relative underperformance. Klassifikation: G10, G14, G24 . 29th January 2004 .
This paper sets out to analyze the influence of different types of venture capitalists on the performance of their portfolio firms around and after IPO. We investigate the hypothesis that different governance structures, objectives, and track records of different types of VCs have a significant impact on their respective IPOs. We explore this hypothesis using a data set embracing all IPOs that have occurred on Germany's Neuer Markt. Our main finding is that significant differences among the different VCs exist. Firms backed by independent VCs perform significantly better two years after IPO as compared to all other IPOs, and their share prices fluctuate less than those of their counterparts in this period of time. On the contrary, firms backed by public VCs show relative underperformance. The fact that this could occur implies that market participants did not correctly assess the role played by different types of VCs.
Schriftsteller sind auch nur Menschen und wollen sich genauso an der jeweiligen Tagesdebatte beteiligen können und sich im Diskursgeschehen der Gesellschaft genauso Gehör verschaffen wie der 'normale' Bundesbürger (wenn sie nicht selbst schon Ursache der Tagesdebatte sind). Doch ist ein Autor 'nur' ein 'normaler' Bundesbürger? Hat er oder sie nicht eine besondere Verpflichtung gegenüber der Gesellschaft, gebührt seiner oder ihrer Stimme nicht ein besonderes Gewicht in der öffentlichen Debatte? So haben wir's doch seit dem deutschen Idealismus gehalten: der Dichter ab Stimme des Volkes, als Statthalter des Gewissens, als Wegweiser und Vordenker, Mahner und Warner und was noch alles mehr. […] An zwei Beispielen, Heinrich Böll und Martin Walser, will [der Autor] nicht nur prüfen, warum gewisse 'menschliche' Äußerungen, die sie taten, „durch Publizität zum Spott oder zum Skandal“ wurden, sondern auch wie sich beide Autoren nachträglich dazu äußerten, und was wir daraus wohl schlußfolgern können.