跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.192.20.240) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/02/24 01:08
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:呂宜真
研究生(外文):Lu, Yi-chen
論文名稱:公司的股利政策、投資決策與融資限制之研究
論文名稱(外文):Investment strategy, dividend policy and financial constraints of the firm
指導教授:楊朝成楊朝成引用關係---
指導教授(外文):Chqu-chen Yang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:財務金融學系研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:財務金融學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:1998
畢業學年度:86
語文別:中文
論文頁數:85
中文關鍵詞:股利政策投資決策融資限制現金流量資本市場
外文關鍵詞:dividend policyinvestment strategyfinancial constraintscash flowcapital market
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:20
  • 點閱點閱:488
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
在不完美的資本市場下,因為資訊不對稱及代理問題,使得廠商面臨或多或少的融資限
制。當廠商面臨融資限制時,由於外部資金取得不易,便須保留較多的盈餘以因應投資之
所需;如果廠商有良好的投資機會,卻苦無資金供應,則會產生所謂"投資不足"的問題。
這種投資對內部資金仰賴的程度越高,反應在投資函數上的結果則為投資對現金流量的敏
感度越大。首先提出可以用"投資對現金流量的敏感性"來判斷公司是否具有融資限制的是
Fazzari, Hubbard, and Petersen (1988),他們以股利發放率為事前分類標準,然後使
用Q model、加速模型以及新古典模型來檢定組間差異,證明其理論方法之可行。之後則
有許多學者依據FHP (1988)的理論方法來作融資限制相關之研究,例如Devereux and Sch
iantarelli (1989)、Hoshi, Kashyap and Scharfstein (1991) 、Kaplan and Zingale
s (1997)等。除了沿用以往學者所使用的OLS方法之外,本研究並使用二階段模型-Probit
Selection Model來進行檢測:首先依據Fazzari, Hubbard, and Petersen (1988)的分
組標準,使用Probit Model,將廠商依照現金股利的發放與否為標準來進行分組,然後再
使投資函數的延申模型Q model來檢測各組之間是否存有融資限制的差異。本研究從投資
理論出發,以更嚴謹的研究方法,透過檢測廠商面臨的融資限制的差異;來探討資本市場
存在的資訊不對稱及代理問題。本研究結果顯示:1、在短期之內,OLS Model與Probit S
election Model 對結果的確存有差異,其中又以解釋變數-Tobin''s Q的差異最大;這表
示,一個實證方法若沒有適當的選取,對於結果而言,將會有極大的不同。不過,這兩種
實證模型對於"以是否發放股利來判斷公司是否具有融資限制"的結果大致相同,也就是:
發放現金股利與否之融資限制雖有差異,但並不顯著,在研究期間的五年間只有二年有顯
著的差異。2、五年皆未發放現金股利的公司相對於五年皆發於現金股利的公司而言,的
確是具有較大的融資限制。因此,本研究的實證結果顯示:長期來看,以發放現金股
If the capital market is imperfect, the asymmetric information and the agency
problem will make firms face financing constraints. When a firm has financing
constraints, meaning that the firm cannot get external financing easily, it m
ay have to retain more earnings in order to supply t its investment needs. If
a firm has a good investment opportunity, but has to give it up just because t
he firm cannot get enough financing, the underinvestment problem occurs. The f
irm whose investment counts more heavily on iFollowing the criteria developed
by Fazzari, Hubbard, and Petersen (1988), I also use another methodology --Pro
bit Selection Model to do the research. Using probit model, this paper separat
es the sample according to their retention ratios, and then uses Q model to ex
amine the difference of financing constraints. The difference of the methodo
logy used in this paper from other scholars'' one is that, here I separate the
sample into some groups according to certain criteria. And then I examine the
differences of investment - cash flow sensitivity among groups to find out whe
ther there exits any financing constraints differences. I use Probit Selection
Model to separate the sample according to their retention ratios, and then us
e Q model to examine the difference of financing constraints. The research s
ets off from investment theory, uses more robust methodology , and discusses i
nformation asymmetry and agency problem by examining the financing constraints
of the firm.The empirical result shows that: 1.There exit some differences be
tween OLS model and Probit Selection Model, especially in the explanatory vari
able-Tobin''s q. Meaning that choosing different methodologies can make differ
ent results. So choosing a better one is an important work. Besides, the resul
t of examining financial constraints of the firm is similar between the two me
thodologies, and there only two out of five years are significantly different
between the two groups..2. In the long run, however, firm
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊