No description available.

We examine the financing choices of undiversified large shareholders or owner-managers in a continuous time structural model with rational expectations. The interplay between the objective of the undiversified, self-interested owner-manager who controls the firm and the valuation of the firms marketed claims by well-diversified outside investors, has a major impact on leverage and debt maturity choices as well as credit spreads. The effect of this interplay is particularly significant in a world where the representative investor (who determines asset prices in the economy) is risk-averse leading to nonzero market prices of systematic risk and risk premia of the firms investment opportunities. In a perfect information framework with no taxes or bankruptcy costs, we show that, the owner-manager could, depending on the projects characteristics, finance them exclusively with debt, exclusively with equity, or with a combination of equity and debt. Ceteris paribus, leverage increases with the expected growth rate of firm value under its investment opportunities, and decreases with its volatility. Debt maturity varies non-monotonically in a U-shaped manner with the expected growth rate, and decreases with the volatility. Our results reconcile empirical evidence on the variation of financing choices with firm characteristics that is not completely consistent with previous theories. The significant impact of the expected returns (therefore, risk premia) of firms investment opportunities on their leverage ratios, debt maturities, and credit spreads are important implications of our theory that cannot be obtained in these models or in models in which all agents are risk-neutral so that risk premia are zero. We empirically test the implications of our theory for the relationships among firms financing and debt maturity choices and the expected growth rate and volatility of their asset values. Controlling for all the significant determinants of firms financing and debt maturity choices identified by earlier studies, we show significant empirical support for our predictions.

We investigate how the evolution of ownership structure affects corporate financial and operating performance and corporate strategies. In particular, we study whether the shift in control rights away from the dominant shareholder mitigates agency problems and accordingly expropriation of minority investors by the controlling shareholder. More specifically, does the increase in power of the second large shareholder manifest in the firm’s operating and financial performance, and financing and operating strategies? Using ownership data for 1996 and 2008 representing 403 firms from nine East Asian countries, we find strong and robust evidence that the change in the voting rights of the second largest shareholder over these twelve years is associated with higher firm valuation, better operating performance, better access to long term financing, more efficient operation management strategies and a higher dividend payout ratio. Consistent with prior literature that finds multiple large shareholders play an internal governance role and mitigate agency problems, our findings imply that an increase in the voting rights of the second large shareholder improves firm’s corporate governance and mitigates agency problems consequently increasing firm performance and improving strategies.

This study is motivated by one of the most prevalent properties of modern corporations: separation of ownership and control. Ownership concentration has been one of the corporate governance mechanisms to solve the agency problem between shareholders and management. Existing literature is mainly concerned with the impact of managerial ownership on firm performance. Little evidence is provided on the impact of general ownership concentration, including multiple large shareholders, on firm performance. This study aims to examine the efficiency of ownership concentration as a corporate governance mechanism, and to explore relevant policy implications to improve firm performance. Based on the company ownership data across a sample of 1291 European companies in the year of 2004, this study shows that European companies' ownership are highly concentrated with the largest three shareholders own more than 60% ownership of company. Industrial companies hold direct controls of European non-subsidiary companies, while private shareholders turn out to be the ultimate owners. On average, there is more than one large shareholder who owns more than 10% of the shares in a European company. A further sample of 655 European companies is used to investigate the relationship between ownership, control and firm performance. A significant non-linear impact of ownership concentration on firm performance with multiple turning points is confirmed. Specifically, Tobin's Q is highest when the Herfindahl index, which incorporates the degree of dispersion of shareholdings other than the largest one, reaches a value of 0.08. The largest shareholding of 10% might also be able to deliver relatively strong performance. Restructuring owner identities could be another efficient governance approach. Direct control from founder owners, ultimate control from insurance companies, and management ownership are beneficial for firm performance, while government, financial institutions except insurance companies and ultimate control of non-financial corporate owners are found to be detrimental for firm performance. Firm performance can also be improved by strengthening the contestability of the controlling coalition's power. The impacts of ownership and control on firm performance are found conditioned by country and industry. Therefore policies should be adjusted according to the companies' institutional environments. Although the endogeneity of ownership concentration and current firm performance is rejected in this study, past firm performance seems to affect current ownership concentration level. Higher accounting rates of return four years ago could result in lower current ownership concentration, while higher last year's Tobin's Q could result in higher current ownership concentration. Capital structure is found to be a significant substitute mechanism for ownership. These elements should be taken into account when the ownership governance mechanism is implemented.

Background: Sweden has a tradition of a concentrated ownership structure where many owners use dual asset classes to maintain corporate control by possessing small portions of the dividend rights. Financial literature has shown that these controlling owners find more incentives to divert corporate resources for private use, at the expense of shareholders. Recent studies also show that involvement in extraction of private benefits leads to long maturity debt as controlling owners avoid frequent monitoring by lenders. As this causes a conflict over corporate debt maturity between controlling and minority shareholders, we investigate if the presence of multiple large shareholders (MLS) mitigates this conflict through control contests. Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is to examine and analyze how different ownership structures affect the informative environment within a firm. In addition, the thesis investigates how ownership structure affect debt maturity structure and what this mean for large and minority shareholders. Method: The study uses a quantitative approach with panel data of 74 publicly traded non – financial Swedish firms over the period of 2006 – 2014. A deductive approach has been applied in order to explain empirical results from theory and previous literature. Results: We find evidence that controlling owners with a separation in control and cash flow rights tend to insulate themselves through long term debt, creating a bad informative environment with information asymmetry and agency costs. Furthermore, our results show robust evidence that MLS mitigates these problems since control contest between large shareholders leads to a shorter debt maturity, yielding a better informative environment. In addition, our results imply that MLS may be an important factor in facilitating financing as investors associate these firms with less risk of extraction of private benefits.

We investigate whether multiple large shareholders (MLS) play an internal corporate governance role in mitigating agency problems between the controlling shareholder and minority shareholders in a cross-country sample of public firms. We draw our conclusion by examining the market reaction (in terms of bidder announcement period abnormal returns) to acquisition announcements made by firms with and without MLS in their ownership structure. Using an international sample of acquisition announcements made by firms with at least one large shareholder from 10 Western European and 5 East Asian countries between 1996 and 2000, we find the presence of MLS, their voting rights, relative voting power, the number of blockholders and the relative voting power of these blockholders have a positive and significant impact on bidder announcement period abnormal returns. We also find that the legal institutions such as disclosure requirement, investor protection, common-law legal origin and anti-self-dealing have positive effects on bidder announcement period abnormal returns.

We investigate whether multiple large shareholders (MLS) play an internal corporate governance role in mitigating agency problems between the controlling shareholder and minority shareholders in a cross-country sample of public firms. We draw our conclusion by examining the market reaction (in terms of bidder announcement period abnormal returns) to acquisition announcements made by firms with and without MLS in their ownership structure. Using an international sample of acquisition announcements made by firms with at least one large shareholder from 10 Western European and 5 East Asian countries between 1996 and 2000, we find the presence of MLS, their voting rights, relative voting power, the number of blockholders and the relative voting power of these blockholders have a positive and significant impact on bidder announcement period abnormal returns. We also find that the legal institutions such as disclosure requirement, investor protection, common-law legal origin and anti-self-dealing have positive effects on bidder announcement period abnormal returns.

L’objectif de cette thèse est d’étudier le rôle des actionnaires contrôleurs dans la prise de décisions financières des entreprises. En particulier, elle met l’accent sur l’effet de la présence et du pouvoir de vote des actionnaires contrôleurs multiples (ACM) sur la prise de risque de l’entreprise, la maturité de la dette et le choix de la source d’endettement. La thèse est composée de trois essais sur le rôle que peuvent jouer les ACM en termes de gouvernance d’entreprise.Le premier essai, intitulé étudie le rôle des ACM dans la prise de risque au sein de l’entreprise. L’utilisation d’un échantillon d’entreprises familiales françaises cotées en bourse sur la période 2003‒2012 montre que la présence, le nombre et le pouvoir de vote des ACM sont associés à une prise de risque plus élevée. Les résultats suggèrent que les ACM contribuent à limiter la propension des propriétaires familiaux à entreprendre des investissements à faible risque. Cet effet est beaucoup plus fort dans les entreprises où les conflits d’agence sont plus susceptibles d’exister. Les résultats mettent en évidence l’importance du rôle de gouvernance joué par les ACM et peuvent améliorer notre compréhension de l’effet de ces actionnaires sur la performance des entreprises familiales.Le deuxième essai, examine le rôle que peuvent jouer les ACM dans la détermination de la maturité de la dette de leurs entreprises. La littérature en gouvernance d’entreprise a montré que les actionnaires contrôleurs peuvent détourner à leurs profits les ressources de leurs entreprises au détriment des autres actionnaires. Un tel comportement conduit ces actionnaires dominants à préférer l’endettement à long terme pour réduire la fréquence du contrôle effectué par les créanciers, ce qui peut créer des conflits entre l’actionnaire dominant et les actionnaires minoritaires portant sur la structure de la maturité de la dette. Dans ce chapitre, nous examinons si la présence des ACM contribue à atténuer ces conflits. À partir de données collectées sur des entreprises françaises cotées en bourse et observées sur la période 1998‒2013, nous trouvons que les entreprises avec des ACM ont tendance à se financer par des dettes à court terme. Ce résultat suggère que la présence des ACM réduit l’extraction de bénéfices privés par l’actionnaire contrôleur, ce qui permet d’enrayer sa tendance à préférer l’endettement à long terme.Le troisième essai, intitulé examine l’effet de la présence et du pouvoir de vote des ACM sur le choix de la source de la dette. Nous utilisons un échantillon de 6 238 observations couvrant 654 entreprises françaises cotées sur la période 1998‒2013. Nous constatons que la présence des ACM et leur pouvoir de vote augmentent le recours à la dette bancaire. De plus, nous trouvons que l’effet des ACM sur le choix de la dette est plus important lorsque les problèmes d’agence entre l’actionnaire dominant et les actionnaires minoritaires sont plus sévères. Dans l’ensemble, nos résultats suggèrent que les ACM réduisent l’opportunisme de l’actionnaire majoritaire qui cherche à se prémunir contre la surveillance bancaire, conduisant à plus de dépendance à l’égard de la dette bancaire. / The present dissertation is a collection of three essays. The first one investigates the role of multiple large shareholders (MLS) in corporate risk-taking. Using a sample of publicly listed French family firms over the period 2003‒2012, we show that the presence, number and voting power of MLS, beyond the controlling owner, are associated with higher risk-taking. Our results suggest that MLS help restrain the propensity of family owners to undertake low-risk investments. This effect is much stronger in firms that are more susceptible to agency conflicts. The results highlight the important governance role played by MLS in family firms and may explain why MLS are associated with higher firm performance.The second essay studies the relation between MLS, beyond the controlling owner, and corporate debt maturity. We employ a large data set of French publicly traded firms during the period 1998–2013 and we find strong evidence that firms with MLS exhibit shorter debt maturity. This result indicates that MLS curb the extraction of private benefits by the controlling owner and reduce her preference for less monitoring through the use of longer maturity debt. The findings are robust to a number of checks, including addressing endogeneity concerns and using alternative sample compositions and alternative regression frameworks.The third essay examines the effect of MLS on the choice of debt source. Using a sample of 6,238 firm–year observations covering 654 French listed firms from 1998 to 2013, we show that reliance on bank debt financing increases with the presence of MLS and with their contestability of the controlling owner’s power. Moreover, we find that the effect of MLS on debt choice is more pronounced when agency problems between controlling and minority shareholders are more severe. Taken together, our results suggest that the presence of MLS reduces the incentive of the controlling owner to avoid scrutiny and to insulate herself from bank monitoring, leading to more reliance on bank debt.