臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本文藉由流動性論(liquidity theory)和市場分割理論(market segmentation theory)可說明流通股股票相對於非流通股具有較高的流動性，所以交易價格較高，因此有較高的流動性溢酬。因此在股權分置改革使得股票全部流通，使原先流通股的流動性溢價消失，非流通股東須支付流通股東對價以補償其損失。本文首先探討完成股權分置改革公司的對價對流通股價值比，再依據最終控制人屬性分類和股改批次說明對價對流通股價值比是否有差異。再分別探討非流通股股東和流通股股東在支付對價以及獲得對價後的價值變化。從非流通股股東的觀點來看，股改後非流通股股東取得流通權，股票價值會提高，因此非流通股股東的價值會增加，然而為了取得流通權非流通股股東必須支付對價，導致價值減少，因此透過本文的分析探究股改後非流通股股東價值的變化；從流通股股東的觀點來看，股改後因流通在外的股數增加，股票供給增加導致價格下跌，流通股股東的價值會因此降低，然而流通股取得對價後價值會增加，因此本文也探討股權分置改革對於流通股股東價值的變化。結果發現非流通股在實施股改後價值增加了113.2%，流通股在實施股改後價値增加了22.7%，對價對流通股價值比為49.74%。迴歸結果發現非流通股價值變化與股改批次先後、對價對流通股價值比呈現負相關。流通股價值與國有控股型態以及對價對流通股價值比呈現正相關，與股改批次先後呈現負相關。

This study uses “the liquidity theory” and “market segmentation theory,” the lack of market liquidity reflects its crucial difference in premiums of tradable shares. Therefore, the reform of the split-share ownership structure allows all stocks tradable and eliminates its premiums. Moreover, those with non-tradable shares should pay considerations to compensate losses of tradable shareholders. First of all, this study is about to present the consideration value to tradable shares’ value ratio of listed companies having finished non-tradable shares and discuss whether or not there were difference in the ratio according to the attributes of working controllers and batches of reforms. Second, this study analyzes the changes of share prices after paying shareholder’s consideration. For non-tradable shareholders, the value of their shares will increase due to obtaining the right of trading shares. To possess the right, however, the non-tradable shareholders have to pay considerations, and that leads to decreasing share prices. For tradable shareholders, after the reform of split-share ownership structure, their stock prices are expected to decrease due to the increasing number of outstanding shares. The value of their shares, however, will rise along with gaining consideration. The study finds that non-tradable shareholders increase up to 113.2% after the reform, while shareholders with tradable shares increase up to 22.7%. The consideration value to tradable shareholders’ value ratio is 49.74%. The relationships between the change of non-tradable shareholders’ wealth which with the batch of the reform and the consideration value to tradable shareholders’ value ratio are negative. Then, the relationships between the change of tradable shareholders’ wealth and batch of the reform is negative, and the relationships between the change of tradable shareholders’ wealth which with the stated owned enterprises and the consideration value to tradable shareholders’ ratio are positive

第一章 導論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究目的 1
第二章 股權分置改革 3
第一節 中國證券市場股權分置背景 3
第二節 股權分置改革之歷程 11
第三節 支付對價與股權分置改革之間關係 18
第四節 中國證券市場股權分置與其流動性之探討 25
第三章 文獻探討 27
第四章 研究假說 33
第五章 研究設計 36
第一節 研究樣本和資料來源 36
第二節 實證模式 37
第六章 實證結果 43
第一節 對價支付方式敘述性統計 43
第二節 敘述性統計 44
第三節 影響股東價值變化實證分析結果 46
第七章 結論 48
參考文獻 50
附錄 支付對價之計算 60

中國統計年鑒，2004，中國統計年鑒，中國北京：中國統計出版社。
王園林與涂曉嵐，2006，股權分置改革回顧與展望，國際經貿探索第22卷第5期，頁51-55。
任夢，2006，中國上市公司股權流通性對股票價格影響研究，中國大連理工大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
何如，2006，股權分置改革操作實務與後改權分置時代，中國北京：華夏出版社，頁79-81。
吳婷婷，2007，中國證券市場股權分置改革意願分析，國立成功大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
吳曉求，2004，中國資本市場：股權分裂與流動性變革，中國北京：中國人民大學出版社。
吳曉求，2004，當前中國資本市場面臨的三大問題，經濟理論與經濟管理，第9期，頁5-10。
李彩玉，2006，中國大陸上市公司股權分置改革之研究，國立臺北大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
肖民贊，2006，我國股權分置改革對價水平影響因素的實證分析，當代經濟，第12期，頁59-62。
肖莉紅，2007，權分置改革中關於對價的實證研究，中國華北電力大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
周炯，2006，股權分置是我國資本市場發展的制度缺陷分析，經濟師，第3期，頁106-108。
林凡與陳斌，2006，股權分置改革中對價確定的影響因素，經濟管哩，第17期，頁48-52。
徐冰，2006，上市公司股權分置改革中對價支付水平的實證研究，黃岡職業學院學報第8卷第1期，頁56-61。
袁懷中，2006，國上市公司股權分置改革研究，中國復旦大學世界經濟研究所博士論文。
張林超，張琴，2006，股權分置改革對購併財務方式的影響，財經科學，第6期，頁38-43。
張金枝，2007，我國股權分置改革中的對價研究，中國新疆財經大學金融學研究所碩士論文。
許偉河，2007，基於市場反應、內幕交易、流通股結構的股權分置改革實證研究，中國對外貿易經濟大學金融學研究所博士論文。
靳慶魯與原紅旗，2006，股權分置改革對價影響因素的實證分析，未發表論文。
廖士光，2007，流動性價值研究综述，當代經濟管理，第2期，頁5-11。
廖旗平與陳建梁，2006，對股權分置改革對價水平影響因素的分析，審計與經濟研究第21卷第3期，頁92-96。
趙俊強，廖士光與李湛，2006，中國上市公司股權分置改革中的利益分配研究，經濟研究，第11期，頁112-122。
閻作遠，2007，股權分置改革合理對價方案及股東超常收益研究，中國吉林大學數量經濟學研究所碩士論文。
聶慶平，2005，我國資本市場的國際化與B股市場的發展定位，當代金融家，第4期，頁54-59。
Amihud, Y. and H. Mendelson, 1986, Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread, Journal of Financial Economics 17, 223-249.
Amihud, Y. and H. Mendelson, 1991a, Liquidity, asset prices and financial policy, Financial Analysts Journal 47, 56 - 66.
Amihud, Y. and H. Mendelson, 1991b, Liquidity, maturity, and the yields on U.S. treasury securities, Journal of Finance 46, 1411 - 1425.
Bagehot W.A., 1971, The only game in town, Financial Analysis Journal 27, 12-14.
Bailey, W. and J. Jagtiani, 1994, Foreign ownership restrictions and stock prices in the Thai capital market, Journal of Financial Economics 36, 57-87.
Bailey, W., 1994, Risk and return on China's new stock markets: some preliminary evidence, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 2, 243-260.
Boardman, A. and A. Vining, 1989, Ownership and performance in competitive environment: a comparison of the performance of private, mixed and state-owned enterprises, Journal of Law and Economics, 32, 1-33
Bodie, Z. and R. C.Merton, 1995, A framework for analyzing the financial system, in Crane et al., Eds., The Global Financial System: A Functional Perspective, Boston. MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Boudoukh, J. and R. F. Whitelaw, 1993, Liquidity as a choice variable: A lesson from the Japanese government bond market, Review of Financial Studies, 6, 265-292.
Boycko, M., A. Shleifer, and R. W. Vishny, 1996, A theory of privatization, The Economic Journal 106, 309-319.
Brito, N.O., 1977, Marketability restrictions and the valuation of capital assets under uncertainty, Journal of Finance, 32, 1109-1123.
Cai J. and L. Xia , 2007, What will privatization bring_the nontradable share issue reform in China, Working Paper. University of Hong Kong.
Chaffe, D., 1993, Option pricing as a proxy for discount for lack of marketability in private company valuations, Business Valuation Review 13, 182-188.
Chen, Z. and P. Xiong, 2001, Discounts on illiquid stocks: evidence from China, Working Paper, Yale ICF Working Paper No. 00-56.
Ehrlich, I., G..H. Georges, L. Zhiqiang and L. Randall, 1994, Productivity growth and firm ownership: an empirical investigation, Journal of Political Economy 102, 1006-1038
Engle R.F. and J. Lange, 2001, Predicting VNET: A model of the dynamics of Market Depth, Journal of Financial Markets 4, 113-142.
Errunza, V., and E. Losq, 1985, International asset pricing under mild segmentation: theory and test”, Journal of Finance 40, 105 - 124.
Errunza, V., and E. Losq, 1989, Capital flow controls, international asset pricing and investor's welfare: A multicountry framework, Journal of Finance 44, 1025-1037.
Eun, C. S. and S. Janakiramanan, 1986, A model of international asset pricing with a constraint on the foreign equity ownership, Journal of Finance 41, 897 - 914.
Feng L. and W. Xu., 2007, Has the reform of nontradable shares raised prices? an event-study analysis, Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 43, 33–62.
Frydman, R., C. Gray, M. Hessel, and A. Rapaczynski, 1999, When does privatization work? The impact of private ownership on corporate performance in the transition economies, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 114, 1153-1191.
Hietala, P. T., 1989, Asset pricing in partially segmented markets: evidence from the finnish market, The Journal of Finance 44, 697 - 718.
Huang, M., 2003, Liquidity shocks and equilibrium liquidity premia, Journal of Economic Theory 109, 104-129.
Jorion, P. and E. Schwartz, 1986, Integration vs. segmentation in the Canadian stock market, Journal of Finance 41, 603-614.
Kyle, A, 1985, Continuous auctions and insider trading, Econometrica 53, 1315–1335.
Laffont, J. and J. Tirole, 1993, A theory of incentives in procurement and regulation,Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lau,S. T. and T. Mclnish, 1996, Foreign share ownership restrictions, Working Paper, University of Memphis.
Li, K., T. Wang, Y. L. Cheung, and P. Jiang, 2007, Removing market friction and sharing the gain: Evidence from the split share structure reform in China, Working Paper, University of British Columbia.
Lippman, S., and J. McCall. 1986, An operational measure of liquidity, American Economic Review 76, 43-55.
Longstaff, Francis A., 1995a, How much can marketability affect security values? The Journal of Finance 50, 1767-1774.
Longstaff, Francis A., 1995b, Placing no-arbitrage bounds on the value of nonmarketable and thinly-traded securities, Advances in Futures and Options Research 8, 203-228.
Longstaff, Francis A., 2001, Optimal portfolio choice and the valuation of illiquid securities, The Review of Financial Studies 14, 407-431.
Mayers, D., 1972, Nonmarketable assets and capital market equilibrium under uncertainty. In Studies in the theory of capital markets, New York, NY:Praeger.
Mayers, D., 1973, Nonmarketable assets and the determination of capital asset prices in the absence of riskless asset, Journal of Business 46, 258-267.
Mayers, D., 1976, Nonmarketable assets, market segmentation and the level of asset prices, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 11, 1-12.
Pratt, S. P., 1989, Valuing a business-the analysis and appraisal of closely-held companies, NY: Dow-Jones-Irwin.
Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny, 1994, Politicians and firms, Quarterly Journal of Economics 109, 995-1025.
Silber, William L., 1991, Discounts on restricted stock: the impact of illiquidity on stock prices, Financial Analysts Journal 47, 60-64.
Solnik, B. H., 1977, Testlng international asset pricing: some pessimistic views, Journal of Finance 32,503 - 512.
Stapleton, R.C. and M.G. Subrahmanyam, 1979, Marketability of assets and the price of risk, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 14, 1-10.
Stulz R.M., 1981, On the effects of barriers to international investment. Journal of Finance 36, 923–934.