The choice of an issuance method for selling subsequent equity is indeed an important corporate financial decision. The recent popularity of private placements over traditional seasoned equity offering (SEO) methods motivates this review on the determinants of firms’ choice between ‘private’ and ‘non-private’ routes for follow-on equity financing. Empirical results are generally consistent with the theoretical propositions. The review suggests further empirical evidence and importance of dynamic models to extensively explain the choice of an equity floatation method by listed companies.
AkerlofG.A. (1970). The market for ‘‘lemons’’: Quality uncertainty and the market and mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84 (3), 488–500.
2.
ArmitageS., & SnellA. (2002). Rights issues versus private placements: Theory and UK evidence (Working Paper). Edinburgh, UK: The University of Edinburgh.
3.
AzizF. (2013). Issuance choice of rights offerings versus private placements: Evidence from Malaysia (Working Paper). Bundoora, Australia: La Trobe University.
4.
BalachandranB., FaffR., TheobaldM., VelayuthamE., & VerwijmerenP. (2013). Does quality signalling and mispricing explain the choice and long-term impact of seasoned equity offering methods? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of European Financial Management Association, Reading, UK.
5.
BarclayM.J., HoldernessC.G., & SheehanD.P. (2007). Private placements and managerial entrenchment. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(4), 461–484.
6.
BootA.W A., GopalanR., & ThakorA.V. (2006). The entrepreneur’s choice between private and public ownership. Journal of Finance, 61(2), 803–836.
7.
ChemmanurT.J., & FulghieriP. (1999). A theory of the going-public decision. Review of Financial Studies, 12(2), 249–279.
8.
ChenH.C., DaiN., & SchatzbergJ.D. (2010). The choice of equity selling mechanisms: PIPEs versus SEOs. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(1), 104–119.
9.
CronqvistH., & NilssonM. (2005). The choice between rights offerings and private equity placements. Journal of Financial Economics, 78(2), 375–407.
10.
EckboB.E., & MasulisR.W. (1992). Adverse selection and the rights offer paradox. Journal of Financial Economics, 32(3), 293–322.
11.
EckboB.E., & NorliO. (2004). The choice of seasoned-equity selling mechanism: Theory and evidence (Working Paper). New Hampshire, US: Tuck School of Business.
12.
FlorosI.V., & SappT.R.A. (2010). Why do so many firms issue private equity repeatedly? On the information content of multiple PIPE offerings (Working Paper). Ames, USA: Iowa State University.
13.
GohJ., GombolaM.J., LeeH.W., & LiuF.Y. (1999). Private placement of common equity and earnings expectations. Financial Review, 34(3), 19–32.
14.
GomesA., & PhillipsG. (2012). Why do public firms issue private and public securities?Journal of Financial Intermediation, 21(4), 619–658.
15.
HertzelM., & SmithR.L. (1993). Market discounts and shareholder gains for placing equity privately. Journal of Finance, 48(2), 459–485.
16.
JensenM., & MecklingW. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
17.
KahnC., & WintonA. (1998). Ownership structure, speculation and shareholder information. Journal of Finance, 53(1), 99–130.
18.
LeeH.W., & KocherC. (2001). Firm characteristics and seasoned equity issuance method: Private placement versus public offering. Journal of Applied Business Research, 17(3), 23–36.
19.
LelandH.E., & PyleD.H. (1977). Informational asymmetries, financial structure, and financial intermediation. Journal of Finance, 32(2), 371–387.
20.
Li-meiH.E., & Wei-xiY.U. (2009). The choice between public offering and private placement: New insights from Chinese data. Paper presented at Sixteenth International Conference on Management Science and Engineering, Moscow, Russia.
21.
LucasD., & McDonaldR. (1990). Equity issues and stock price dynamics. Journal of Finance, 45(4), 1019–1044.
22.
MaksimovicV., & PicherP. (1999). Private versus public offerings: Optimal selling mechanisms with adverse selection (Working Paper). US: University of Maryland and Boston College.
23.
MyersS.C., & MajlufN.S. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2), 575–591.
24.
NessW.L., & Bordeaux-RegoR. (2006). The choice between public issues and private placements of equity in Brazil (Working Paper). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: University of Rio de Janeiro.
25.
PaganoM., & RoellA. (1998). The choice of stock ownership structure: Agency costs, monitoring, and the decision to go public. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(1), 187–225.
26.
PetrovaM., YangY.W., & YildirimY. (2008). The choice of public vs. private equity: Evidence from the SEO and PIPE markets (Working Paper). New York, US: Syracuse University.
27.
SchleiferA., & VishnyR. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy, 94(3), 461–488.
28.
SlovinM.B., SushkaM.E., & LaiK.W.L. (2000). Alternative flotation methods, adverse selection, and ownership structure: Evidence from seasoned equity issuance in the UK. Journal of Financial Economics, 57(2), 157–190.
29.
SubrahmanyamA., & TitmanS. (1999). The going-public decision and the development of financial markets. Journal of Finance, 54(3), 1045–1082.
30.
VilaM.M. (2009). PIPEs: A theory of private vs. public placements in public firms (Working Paper). Los Angeles, US: University of California.
31.
WruckK.H. (1989). Equity ownership concentration and firm value: Evidence from private equity financings. Journal of Financial Economics, 23(1), 3–28.
32.
WuX., & WangZ. (2007). Private benefits of control and the choice of seasoned equity flotation method (Working Paper). Kowloon, Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
33.
WuY.L. (2004). The choice of equity selling mechanisms. Journal of Financial Economics, 74(1), 93–119.
