The role of existing shareholders in private equity placements in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article, we investigate how the participation of firms’ existing shareholders affects the pricing and valuation of private investments in public equity (PIPEs). Using a large sample of PIPEs issued by Chinese listed firms from 2006 to 2019, we find that the effective discount and long‐term buy‐and‐hold abnormal stock returns of PIPEs with existing shareholder participation are significantly higher than those with only new investor participation, after controlling for heterogeneous types of PIPE investors. However, the superior post‐PIPE stock performance of deals with existing shareholders is not driven by improved operating performance but by tunneling activities such as frequent dividend announcements, related‐party transactions, and positive earnings management during the lock‐up period. Our findings suggest that the effect of existing shareholders’ participation in private equity placements is more consistent with the tunneling hypothesis than the certification hypothesis. We document that the tunneling incentives are stronger when firms face greater financial constraints and can be mitigated when the firm's corporate governance is stronger.
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 | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".