Initial and Aftermarket Performance of IPO Stocks: Evidence from Greece.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThe pricing of Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) in the short-run and long-run has beenexamined by numerous theoretical and empirical studies referring to the main international stockmarkets. In Europe, the specific topic has gained increasing prominence in the last few yearspartly as a result of increasing number of companies gaining a stock market listing (i.e. ‘goingpublic’). This short paper extends the European literature on IPOs by examining the case ofthe Athens Stock Exchange (ASE). In particular, the study is conducted on the ASE Main andParallel Markets between January 1999 and April 2004. All 144 IPOs are examined to deter-mine both the short-run and long-run stock performance after going public. The results provideevidence consistent with the existing literature that report short-term excess returns associatedwith IPOs. Specifically, our study shows that Greek IPOs are on average underpriced by 25.4%.In contrast to the results from other markets, however, we find no evidence of long-run IPOsunderperformance in the ASE.Keywords: Initial public offerings, short-run stock performance, long-run stock performance,Greek stock marketJEL Classification: G24; G32; G14
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".