對TFT-LCD廠商而言，產業的競爭亦可謂長期資本投入之競賽，融資能力為影響競爭力重要課題，本文以友達公司為例，探討TFT-LCD面板廠商之融資決策如何訂定，以符合公司所需。分析結果顯示，就融資順位理論觀察：(1)友達公司偏好內部資金來源。(2)管理當局會依據投資決策來訂定且維持穩定的股利支付率，避免作臨時修改。(3)公司嚴守股利政策下，目前仍以投資資出為優先，並保留現金以備不時之需。(4)當公司需要外部融資時，並非完全依成本的高低，或優先考慮使用負債，而係視財務結構、金融市場狀況、融資成本及集資規模等因素作綜合研判。 在籌資時機方面，針對不同時機，妥善運用各項融資工具：(1)在產業景氣佳股價熱絡時，以發行權益資本融資。(2)在產業景氣差股價表現差時，以溢價發行可轉換公司債融資。(3)在利率低廉公司財務結構佳時，以聯貸案取得所需資金。 本文對台灣TFT-LCD公司之建議為：(1)產業等外部環境變化大，積極之融資規劃為必需之舉(2)適度應用國際籌資工具，達成資產負債自然避險功能，兼具開拓企業知名度作用，此外亦可避免國內資金排擠作用。

Pecking order theory is an important theory in explaining companies’ financing policies. Most previous research works focused on individual country. In our research, we compared the degree to which the pecking order theory is followed in countries worldwide and determined the main macro factors that cause the difference. We use the pecking order coefficient, an indicator meaning that how much of one dollar of external fund will be financed by issuing debt, to measure the degree how firms follow the pecking order in each country. The evidence shows that law enforcement and accounting quality are important determining factors. That is, firms in countries with a stricter law enforcement and higher accounting quality can use more equity because the problems of information asymmetry are less evident. Besides, development of stock market also determines firms’ financing decisions. The stock market serves as a source of fund and facilitates the obtaining of information. Thus, firms in a well-development stock market will use more equity and follow the pecking order to a lesser extent.

隨著世界貿易的日漸發達，經濟變化的腳步亦越來越快，企業唯有不斷投資以維持企業的永續經營，而在不斷投資的過程之中，往往需要考慮不同的資金取得方式以求資金之取得成本最低。 　　依據融資順位理論，企業融資的方式應以資金成本最低之內部融資為主，然後才會考慮外部融資，那麼，台灣地區上市公司融資情況是否符合Myers所提出之融資順位理論(pecking order theory)，此外，上市公司經營績效(ROA、ROE)是否與融資型態、產業別及融資順序有關呢？ 　　本研究之研究期間為民國77年(1988年)第一季至民國84年(1995)年第三季，共計31期資料。研究對象乃針對台灣地區上市公司擁有本研究期間資料之上市公司，共計124家。資料來源為台灣經濟新報之財務資料庫。 　　研究方法為Granger於1981年所提出之Granger因果關係檢定法(Granger Causality Test)，以檢定變數間的因果關係是否符合融資順位理論。 　　在檢定各公司融資的次序是否符合融資順位理論之後，為了進一步瞭解代理問題對公司經營績效的影響，本研究將各期資料平均後，以單因子變異數分析(1-Way ANOVA)來分析在不同融資型態、不同產業以及不同融資順序對於總資產報酬率(ROA)及對股東權益報酬率(ROE)的影響。 　　同時，為避免單因子變異數分析無法對有限的樣本數給予較佳解釋，因此，本研究將資料合併歸類，並採用卡方分析來檢定，以檢定研究變數間的相互關係。 　　依據實證結果發現，共獲致兩個結論： 　　結論一：台灣地區上市公司融資情況不符合融資順位理論 　　結論二：公司經營績效與產業別有關，而與融資型態及融資順序無關 　　由結論二可以推論，企業經營績效的好壞不在於其採用何種融資方式，或者採行某種融資順序，真正影響企業經營績效好壞之關鍵因素是企業所在產業的本身，其中經營績效較好者為塑膠業與水泥業。

本篇論文探討亞太地區債券市場中是否存在著擇時行為，以此區域中三個經濟區為代表—澳洲、新加坡及香港，透過分析此區域2000~2009期間的絕對利率、相對利率與絕對債券發行量、相對債券發行量間之關係，以及進一步控制影響企業債券發行之因素，包括市場的成長機會、再融資及企業特性等，最後，實證結果指出亞太地區之債券市場並無擇時行為之存在，且其融資行為較傾向支持靜態抵換理論，亦即亞太企業進行舉債融資時較可能同時考慮舉債所帶來的正面及負面效果，因此有一最適資本結構存在的可能。 / The purpose of this thesis is to test whether there is market timing behavior existing in Asia-pacific bond market. Using the data during 2000~2009 in three representative places, including Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore, we compare both the absolute and relative interest rate to both the absolute and relative amount of debt issue. In addition, we further control the factors that affect the debt issue of firms, including the market growth opportunities, refinancing and the characteristics of firms. Finally, we find there is no market timing behavior in Asia-pacific bond market. Besides, firms’ financing behavior in Asia-pacific are better explained by the trade-off theory, which means it is possible that there is a optimal capital structure for each firm.

近年來，一方面由於台灣資本市場的發展日益蓬勃，另一方面則因台灣企業日趨大型化、國際化，相對於過去大都趨於現金增資、盈餘及資本公積轉增資等權益型態融資，現階段則更傾向多種融資管道及融資工具的交互運用，可轉換公司債市場發行者日益增加。 因此，本研究欲探討當公司選擇於國內融資，選擇現金增資與發行可轉換公司債之企業，兩者的財務特性是否具有差異；探討當公司選擇發行可轉換公司債，則發行國內可轉換公司債與發行海外可轉換公司債之企業，兩者的財務特性是否具有差異；探討台灣資訊電子業其從事籌資活動時之融資偏好概況。 本研究分別以Multinomial Logit模型以及Nested Logit模型分析民國89至93年間上市上櫃發行國內可轉換公司債、海外可轉換公司債或現金增資之資訊電子業公司，探究發行公司是否具備某種財務特性，而影響其融資選擇。研究結果發現： 1. 以Multinomial Logit模型分析時，選擇發行現金增資及國內可轉換公司債的融資選擇上，資產總額取對數值(表公司規模)、銷貨成長率(表成長性)愈小者，資產報酬率(表獲利能力)、負債比率(表財務風險)、營業利潤率標準差(表營運風險)、自由現金流量比率(表代理問題)愈高者，愈傾向發行國內可轉換公司債。選擇發行海外可轉換公司債及國內可轉換公司債的融資選擇上，資產總額取對數值(表公司規模)、銷貨成長率(表成長性)、營業利潤率標準差(表營運風險)、自由現金流量比率(表代理問題)愈小者，負債比率(表財務風險)、資產報酬率(表獲利能力)愈高者，愈傾向發行國內可轉換公司債。 2. 以Nested Logit模型分析時，選擇發行現金增資及國內可轉換公司債的融資選擇上，資產總額取對數值(表公司規模)及負債比率(表財務風險)愈高者，銷貨成長率(表成長性)、資產報酬率(表獲利能力)、營業利潤率標準差(表營運風險)、自由現金流量比率(表代理問題)愈低者，愈傾向發行國內可轉換公司債。選擇發行海外可轉換公司債及國內可轉換公司債的融資選擇上，資產總額取對數值(表公司規模)、銷貨成長率(表成長性)、營業利潤率標準差(表營運風險)、資產報酬率(表獲利能力)愈小者，負債比率(表財務風險)、自由現金流量比率(表代理問題)愈高者，愈傾向發行國內可轉換公司債。 3. 經由Hausman Test檢定其融資選擇之間的IIA條件之後，發現此三項融資選擇之間無任何相關性，因此可知其適用之模型為Multinomial Logit Model。 4. 對於台灣的資訊電子產業而言，就其財務特性中之公司規模、成長性、獲利能力、財務風險、營運風險以及自由現金流量比率看來，發行海外可轉換公司債均應至少屬其融資時的前二位選擇。 5. 影響企業傾向選擇發行海外可轉債的機率程度由大致小排列為：公司規模、獲利能力、財務風險、營運風險、成長性、自由現金流量比率。 / In recent years, more and more companies tend to finance with other instruments except for seasoned equity offerings. Therefore, my paper attempts to explore if there exists differences in the financial characteristics of the companies who finance with seasoned equity offerings or convertible bonds, and if there exists differences in the financial characteristics of the companies who finance with European convertible bonds or domestic convertible bonds. Besides, I try to find the general situation of the financing behavior in the information and electronic industry in Taiwan. The main empirical results show: 1. The financing behavior of information and electronic industry in Taiwan is suitable for the use of Multinomial Logit model. It means that three financing instruments, seasoned equity offering, European convertible bond, and domestic convertible bond, are independent with each other. 2. As for the information and electronic industry in Taiwan, issuing European convertible bonds is probably the first two choices when discussing the financial characteristics of the firm size, growth, profitability, financial risk, operational risk and the ratio free cash flow. 3. The most influential factor that causes companies to issue European convertible bonds instead of domestic convertible bonds is firm size. And the least influential factor that causes companies to issue European convertible bonds instead of domestic convertible bonds is the ratio of free cash flow.

近年來，隨著國內產業結構之轉變，以及金融自由化政策之推動，企業經營環境已隨著大幅改變。本研究的目的，主要在於探討這些轉變對於國內上市公司資本結構是否會造成重大的影響。 　　本研究資料乃取自教育部EPS資料庫與臺灣經濟新報社資料庫，樣本期間為民國78年到82年，共120家上市公司。研究方法主要採用變異成份模型(Variance Component Model)與誤差成份模型(Error Component Model)來研究上市公司資本結構的影響因素。並作共線性檢定、自我相關檢定及異質性檢定，若有異質變異數之現象產生，則以White [1980]之方法加以修正。 　　變異成份模型實證結果發現在分析資本結構的時候，以個別公司為分析單位較以假設個別公司同質的整個產業為分析單位為適當。 　　誤差成份模型實證結果發現（一）在全部產業方面：獲利能力、股利支付率與負債比率呈顯著負相關；資產抵押價值、成長機會、規模大小、稅盾利益、金融開放程度與負債比率呈顯著正相關；而營運風險、研究發展費用率、廣告費用率與負債比率雖不顯著，但是為負值。（二）在製造業方面：獲利能力、股利支付率、研究發展費用率與負債比率呈顯著負相關；成長機會、稅盾利益、金融開放程度與負債比率呈顯著正相關；而營運風險、廣告費用率與負債比率皆不顯著，但為負值，而資產抵押價值、規模大小與負債比率亦不顯著，但為正值。（三）在非製造業方面：獲利能力、廣告費用率、股利支付率與負債比率呈顯著負相關；資產抵押價值、規模大小、研究發展費用率、金融開放程度與負債比率呈顯著正相關；而營運風險與負債比率呈不顯著，但為負值，而成長機會、稅盾利益與負債比率呈不顯著，但為正值。

生技產業為我國未來六大明星產業之一，除政府成立生技創投基金，民間企業也陸續加入這波生技投資行列，如永豐餘集團旗下的上智生技創投，與潤泰集團旗下的鑽石生技投資。以籌資來源而言，又分為借款融資關係(負債端)的外部資金，以及股東投資關係(權益端)的自有資金兩種，對於公司經營各有優缺點，亦應取得平衡。唯目前多數為權益端的資金投入，尤其以該產業中風險最高的新藥研發公司為例，仍普遍高達95%以上的股東權益比率。顯示其籌資來源有限，且難以吸引負債端的投資者參與。而這樣的資金來源比例，除不符合企業融資順位理論於公司成長階段的籌資策略與負債權益比率，權益端資金多以短期獲得高利潤為目的，以資金性質亦不適合占資產達95%以上之比例。 以目前負債端籌資管道，新藥研發公司多數利用台灣中小企業信用保證基金直保部或經濟部促進產業創新或研究發展貸款計畫專案申請，唯融資額度上限遠不足以支付藥物開發費用，且非一般負債端直接經由銀行評估取得融資之方式。綜觀國際業態，單一全新藥物開發至上市平均需約USD8億元(約NTD240億元)不等，而台灣公司的研發策略多數為分段發展或老藥新用(藥物重新定位)策略，但仍有高度資金需求。唯銀行、負債端投資者普遍缺乏投入該產業的意願，主要顧慮為具冗長的產品研發週期業態、高度不確定性的產品上市審查、長期臨床試驗伴隨的高額成本。此外，對於資金專注研發之新藥研發公司，亦面臨擔保品不足之問題。而實務上，負債端資金提供者如銀行，對於複雜的生技領域與新藥研發公司業態不甚了解，為降低融資意願的另一主因。 故本研究旨在建立一套適用於新藥研發公司之一般性價值評估方式，解決此雙方認知差異問題，以增加更多元的籌資管道。其中，本文參考其他國家評估方法，選擇其中針對技術型公司、發展久遠的韓國技術信用保證基金KOTEC評估模式，導入台灣微脂體、基亞生物科技、賽德醫藥科技3間新藥研發公司個案作一評估。並於最後研究結論，經由分析比較個案公司間歷年經營狀況，得出公司整體與個別質、量性指標項目量化的相對分數，以台灣微脂體分數157分最高，基亞生技次之。本研究亦參考個案評估狀況，得出該類公司較佳的一般性經營策略結論，發現公司創立早期可先以開發週期短、風險較低的老藥新用開發以代替副業產生短期營收的效用，同時累積本業開發經驗，待時機成熟再轉入全新藥物開發為一攻守兼具的經營模式，以供新藥研發公司參考。此外，本研究屬於探索性研究，僅於評估新藥研發公司分數階段，尚未轉換為公司融資評等。該部分尚待具一定案源量後，以統計模型將評估分數與還款違約率關聯性做一分析，方能計算融資評等。而建立內部評等模型、資訊系統對台灣銀行規模而言，為一額外高昂成本，亦建議可效法韓國由政府主導為可行方式之一。 / The biotechnology industry is one of the six future stars of the industries in Taiwan. The government established Biotechnology Venture Capital (BVC), and the more and more private companies joined the procession of biotech investments, such as the two famous biotech funds, Taiwan Global BioFund (TGB) and Diamond BioFund Inc.. According to sources of funding, we can divided them into two groups: one is the loan of external funds (liability side), and the other is the shareholder investment of internal funds (equity side), both of them have different advantages and disadvantages for the company, and the company should strike a balance between these advantages and disadvantages. However, the majority of the funds are invested from the equity side, especially the new drug development companies, which are the highest risk types in the industry, and most of their equity ratio is higher than 95 %. This information indicates the limited sources of funding, and the difficulty to attract liability side’s investors to participate. That proportion of funding sources doesn’t comply with the company’s financing strategy and debt to equity ratio in the growth stage of the enterprise life cycle in the pecking order theory, and equity side’s funds are not suitable for accounting for more than 95% of assets in balance sheet because most of them want to get high profits in the short-term. Currently, major new drug development companies usually apply for loans from the Direct Guarantee Dept. of the Small & Medium Enterprise Credit Guarantee Fund of Taiwan (Taiwan SMEG) or the Promote Industrial Innovation or R&D Loan Program of Industrial Development Bureau in Taiwan, but the amount of loan is insufficient to cover the costs for the new drug development, and this method is not a general way to obtain liability side’s financing from the bank’s direct evaluation. In the international situation, the progress from development to sale of a single new drug spends about US $800 million (about NT $24 billion) on average. Despite Taiwan's R&D strategies only cover the sectional development progress or the policy of the new usage of old drugs (drug repositioning), there is still a high degree of capital requirement. However, in the present, banks and other liability side’s investors still lack the will to invest in the new drug development companies. These investors concern about several major problems, including the lengthy product development cycle, high uncertainty of the product examination and approval, the high cost of long-term clinical trials in this industry. In addition, these companies are also faced with the problem of lacking collateral, because they invest much money in new drug R&D. On the other hand, liability side’s investors, such as banks, don’t understand the complex field of new drug development companies' business models, and this situation becomes another reason for reducing the financing will. Therefore, we should establish a general evaluation method applicable to new drug development companies, to solve the problem of cognitive differences between liability side’s investors and the borrowers, and expand the funding sources of these companies. This article refers to the actual evaluation method in other countries, chooses the most suitable and well developed evaluation model --- Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC)’s evaluation method for the technology-based company, and utilizes the method to evaluate three cases of the new drug development companies in Taiwan, including Taiwan Liposome Co., Medigen Biotechnology Crop., and CytoPharm, Inc.. In conclusion of the study, by analyzing and comparing the three companies’ operating situations in recent years, we can get relative quantified scores from the companies’ overall and individual qualitative, quantitative indicators, and the result is that Taiwan Liposome Co. gets the highest score, 157 points, then Medigen Biotechnology Crop. gets the middle one. This study also refers the case situations, to find a better general business strategy for such companies. We find that new drug development company in the early stage can focus on new usage development of old drugs ,which has advantages of short development cycle and lower risk, to replace the sideline that generates short-term revenue, and accumulate the experience of drug development. When the time is ripe, it can transfer to new drug development. This way is the general suggestion of both offensive and defensive business model for new drug development companies. In addition, this study is an exploratory research, which only focuses on the evaluation stage, and has not converted the result into a corporate financing credit rating. To calculate financing credit ratings, we require a lot of historical cases data to establish a statistical analysis model, and link evaluation scores with repayment default rates. The establishment of an internal rating model or information system incurs high additional costs for the size of the banks in Taiwan, so the recommended one of the possible ways is that we can follow the example led by the South Korea Government.