1 chapter 1 primary market making--- underwriting theory

Post on 29-Mar-2015

241 Views

Category:

Documents

2 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

TRANSCRIPT

1

Chapter 1

Primary Market Making---

Underwriting Theory

2

A. Investment Bank Reputation Theory

3

(A) Assumptions

1. Two period model, t=0, t=1. Three risk neutral agents: entrepreneurs, investment banks, and investors, risk-free rate=0

2. Firms are of two types f=G or f=B. Investment bank valuation of firm of two types: e=G or e=B.

r: prob. of good evaluation to a bad firm.

r [p,1], p>0. prob(e=G f=G)=1; Prob(e=G f=B)=r∣ ∣3. Investment banks are of two types, I=H or I=N

α0 : Prob. of no cost type investment bank

4. Evaluation cost C(r), Cr <0, C(1)=0. Investment banking fee k surplus value, k (0,1)

4

(B) Model

1. Firm valuation

}

)1(

1

)1({)(

0

0

0

000

HN rrV

5

2. Investment Bank Objective(1) High-cost type Investment Bank

(2) No-Cost type Investment Bank

)()( 1111HSH rcuvk

Revenue Cost

)(])1([)1(

][

][)()(

111010

10

100000

HBHGH

H

HHH

rckuvrvr

kEwhere

Ercuvk

][)(

)(

10000

111

HH

SH

Euvk

uvk

6

3. The Entrepreneur’s Objective

Proceed from direct sale:

Proceed from investment Bank sale:

Choice of firm type f at t:

)}({ ttt uvkv tu

},{, Rumm ft

ft

tttt

ttttft

uuvkvifR

uuvkvifUm

)(

)(

7

4. Equilibrium• Proposition I : In equilibrium,

(1) Investment Bank Choices:

Both high cost and no cost investment banks market only the equity of firms that obtain good evaluation by the above evaluation standard.

(2) Entrepreneur choices:

1;

;**

**

10

10

HH

NN

rpr

prr

BeifRmm

Geifummmm

BB

BGBG

**

****

10

1100

8

(3) Investor beliefs along the equilibrium path,

at t=0,

t=1,

Investor beliefs off the equilibrium path: at either date, investors set Prob(I=N)=0, in response to out-of-equilibrium choices by investment banks. They set Prob(f=G)=0 in response to out-of-equilibrium choices by entrepreneurs.

0

})1(

1

)1({)(,

)(

0

0

0

0

0000

0

RmGfprob

rrVUmGeGfprob

NIprob

f

HNf

0

})1(

1

)1({)(,

1

1

1

1

1111

1

1

RmGfprob

rrVUmGeGfprob

BSNIprob

andGSNIprob

f

H

S

N

SSSf

B

G

9

• Proposition II:

The equilibrium evaluation standard set by the high-cost type represents a unique interior solution

if the magnitude of the marginal cost of changing the evaluation standard, is a constant that satisfies the parametric restriction:

*

0Hr

)1(*

0 pr H rC

]})1()[1(}{)1()]1([{

)1()1()1(

0000

00222

ppp

pkc

c

10

• Proposition III: (Effect of a change in reputation) (i) For low reputation values , the high-cost investment bank’s eval

uation standard is stricter as its reputation is greater, ie. is decreasing in

(ii) For tending to 1, the high-cost investment bank’s evaluation standard becomes less strict as its reputation is greater, ie. is increasing in

0*

0Hr

0

0*

0Hr

0

Reputation Smile0

*

0Hr

11

• Proposition IV: (Comparative Statics)

(i) The high-cost investment bank’s time 0 evaluation

standard is stricter as the fraction k of the surplus value

charge as a fee increase.

(ii) The high-cost investment bank’s time 0 evaluation

standard is less strict as the marginal cost, c, of setting

a stricter standard increases.

(iii) For low reputation values, small, and >1/2, the

variance of the true value of firms marketed by the

high-cost type at time 0 is decreasing in its reputation.

0

12

(C) Implications

1. Investment banks and information asymmetry:• Investment banks with greater reputation capital are more

effective in reducing the impact of information asymmetry in the equity market.

• The extent of under-pricing is a decreasing function of the reputation of the investment bank underwriting the IPO.

2. Reputation and equity value uncertainty:• The greater the reputation of the investment bank, the lower is

the variance of possible firm value of the firms it markets.

13

3. Reputation and underwriter compensation:Underwriters with greater reputation capital charge larger fees and therefore have higher gross incomes than their less prestigious rivals.

4. Reputation and equity offer proceeds:The proceed, net of underwriting fees, accruing to issuing firms are increasing in underwriting reputation.

5. Reputation and underwriter choice:Firms prefer to use the services of the most prestigious investment bank that agrees to market their equity, even when the amount charged as fees is larger for more prestigious investment banks.

14

6. Underwritter vs. Non-underwritter offerings:

Firms that face an asymmetrically informed equity market prefer to make underwritter equity offering rather than market the equity directly.

15

B. Strategic Venture Investing Theory

16

(A) Assumptions

1. Risk neutral with no discounting.

2. An entrepreneur E starts a venture I , with no wealth, approaching independent venture capitalist V, or strategic investor S.

3. Two state, success and failure, p , (1-p)

17

(B) Model

• Case I, E+V

• Case II, E+S

)0(1

)']1,0[(

00

ablenontranferu

sharessvbeuSuccess

uuFailure

vE

vvv

vE

su

successinassetsSuSuSuccess

ufailureinassetsSuuFailure

E

SS

ESS

1

)'(

0)'(

18

• Let

: net impact of strategic actions between new venture and asset of strategy investor.

then, if >0, S has a complementary asset

if <0, S has a substitute asset.

• Let

• V financing:

V is active investor (hold a board seat)

SS uu

Base prob. of success

2

2

1)(, iiiiii cpPq

Increase prob. of success

SSvSVS

vvvvVv

SvvVE

IquU

IcqU

qU

)(

)(

)1(

19

• S financing:

IcquU

qU

SSSSSS

SSSE

)()(

)1(

20

1. Optimal choice of investorsDefine

Suppose S and V are equally able,

(i) if Pure S financing.

(ii) if Pure V-financing.

(iii) if mix financing, where V is active and S is passive

)()(

)(

111

*00

VE

SE

vv

uufrom

from

01 010

0 Sq

vqMvq

10

0

*qq

financingMixedMv *qq

financingVPure

v *qq

financingSPure

S

21

2. Comparative Statics

(i) 10 ,

0

)( 2* q

)( 1* q

)( 2Sq)( 1Sq

vq

)( 20 )( 10 1

financingVPure financingSPure

financingVPureof

rangeincreased

22

(ii) 10 , I*q

)( 2IqS

)( 1IqS

)( 2Iqv

)( 1Iqv

)( 10 I )( 20 I1

0

financingMixedof

rangeIncreased financingVPure financingSPure

23

(iii) 10 ,)( SS porP

financingVPure

financingSPureof

rangeincreased financingSPure

1

0 0 )( 2

1 SP

)( 2*SS Pq

)( 1**SSv Pqq

)( 2SS Pq

)( 1SS Pq

vq

24

(IV) 10 ,)( vv porP

)( 2*vv Pq

)( 1**vvS Pqq

Sq

)( 2vv Pq

)( 1vv Pq

)( 20 vP )( 1

0 vP)( 1

1 vP )( 21 vP

financingVPureof

rangeincreased

financingSPure

0

top related