MARKET IMPACT OF COVID-19 TO ANNOUNCEMENTS OF CANADIAN EQUITY OFFERINGS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Did COVID-19 period (March 11, 2020 -Nov.29, 2021) have differential impact on the market reaction of Canadian bought deal seasoned equity offering announcements compared with pre- COVID-19 period (Jan.13,2012-March 10, 2020)?How did expected determinants of equity offers affect the market reaction in COVID-19 period compared with pre-pandemic period?Using univariate and multivariate analysis, this study shows no significant difference on the market reaction between pre-and COVID-19 periods.On the other hand, results show determinants have more significant effect on market reaction in the COVID-19 period than in the pre-pandemic period, which was mostly insignificant.For example, in COVID-19 period, offers with favorable market effect are those from health care companies, and those which intended uses of funds are capital investments, debt decrease, and exploration or development.Similarly, positive effect occurs for offers audited by the Big 4 accounting firms, and those sold by existing shareholders (not capital raising) among others.Surprisingly, stock market volatility had favorable market effect in the COVID-19 period.This is an unexpected finding since investors usually unwelcome market volatility.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".