跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.120.150) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/03 07:14
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:曾國富
研究生(外文):Tseng, Kuo Fu
論文名稱:影響上市櫃公司選擇企業分割方式之關鍵性因素
論文名稱(外文):The Critical Elements for Affecting List and OTC Company Choosing Divestiture Methods
指導教授:李建然李建然引用關係
指導教授(外文):Lee, Jan Zan
口試委員:陳信吉湯麗芬
口試日期:2012-07-20
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺北大學
系所名稱:會計學系
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:會計學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:42
中文關鍵詞:權益分割資產分割經營績效公司治理資訊透明度
外文關鍵詞:Equity Carve-OutsSpin-OffsOperating PerformancesCorporate GovernancesInformation Transparency
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:3
  • 點閱點閱:291
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:25
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
國內近年來追隨歐美腳步,積極進行企業分割(Divestiture)。過去國內外有關企業分割之研究多聚焦於企業宣告分割後,長短期之績效表現;至於在影響企業選擇分割因素之研究,則相對較為少見。本研究主要係探討國內上市櫃公司選擇企業分割方式之關鍵因素,經實證結果,可以歸納得到下列幾項結論:
一、負債比率與宣告權益分割公司呈現顯著負相關,代表負債比率愈高的公司,在進行企業分割時,傾向使用資產分割方式,此與國外研究迥然而異,分析其原因為,如果母公司負債比率較高,企業越會選擇資產分割方式(兄弟式分割)進行分割,因為把核心及良好資產及帶著原母公司之股東分割出去,比較不會受到母公司負債比率過高的負面影響。故此一結果應符合國內市場實務面。
二、經營績效(ROE)與宣告權益分割公司呈現負相關,顯示宣告權益分割的公司經營績效較佳,但不顯著。分割規模與宣告權益分割公司呈現負相關,顯示分割規模愈小的公司在進行企業分割時,愈會選擇使用權益分割,此與國外的研究結果相同,但也不顯著。
三、分割規模及產業聚焦與宣告權益分割公司呈現不顯著負相關,即被分割部門佔母公司規模及被分割部門所經營事業若與母公司不同,則在進行企業分割時,較會選擇資產分割,此結果與國外研究結果並不一致,主要應與兄弟式分割比較能達到實質產業聚焦的目標有關。
四、母公司規模及資訊透明度與宣告權益分割公司亦呈現負相關,顯示母公司規模愈大,反而傾向兄弟式分割,因規模太大的公司,宣告企業分割需有實質重組考量,而兄弟式分割比較能達到實質重組的目的。不過由於不顯著,因此不具統計上的意義。
五、董監持股比例與宣告權益分割呈現正相關,顯示公司治理愈好的企業在宣告分割時,愈會選擇權益分割,此與國外的研究結果一致,惟不顯著。因此不具統計上的意義。
關鍵字:權益分割、資產分割、經營績效、公司治理、資訊透明度

Following with the occident countries, Divestiture has been widely used for years while it has been effectively recently in Taiwan. The past research regarding to the divestiture was focus in the short-term and long-term operating performance while the company declared the divestiture procedure. It’s rarely to see the related research regarding to the critical elements affecting the company choosing divestiture methods. The study is mainly researching the critical elements which affecting Taiwan list and OTC company choosing divestiture methods. The conclusion of empirical studies can be summarized in the following points :
1. The debt ratio shows significant negative value with the company which declare the method of equity carve-out, it represent that while the company performing the divestiture procedure, and the higher of the debt ratio will tend the company choosing spin-off method. The consequence is different with the study of other countries, To analyze the situation, it shows that the company will choose the spin-off method if the parent company has the higher debt ratio, because to spin-off the core and well assets together with the proportionally shares of the shareholders will suffering less negative effects of higher debt ration of the parent company.
2. Compared with the same industries, after the Equity Carve-Outs announcement in the listed domestic companies, the operating performance is certainly better than the others in the same field. From the ROE, After the Equity Carve-Outs, ROE is better than before. It shows significantly positive value after the second and third year. However, if we analyze with DuPont Analysis, ROE is superior after the Equity Carve-Outs not because of the growth of the rate of the profit but the use of the financial leverage. It can be referred to why Tobin's q is still negative after the revision of the industry. That is the market isn’t optimistic to Equity Carve-Outs.
3. The scale of the divestiture and the industrial focus shows non-significant negative value, it represent that the spin-off part rated the scale of the parent company and the operating industry for the spin-off part as to the parent company is different, will tend to choose spin-off method. The research conclusion is not consistent to other countries, the reasons are mainly on the spin-off method can reach the purpose for the real industrial focus.
4. The size and the information transparency of the parent company shows negative value with the company which declare equity carve-out method, it represent that the bigger size of the parent company will tend to performing spin-off method, because the bigger size of the company, owing to the re-organization consideration, the spin-off method can reach the purpose of the re-organization of the company. But the statistical value is not significant.
5. The holding shares ratio of the Directors and the Supervisors shows positive value with the company which declare equity carve-outs method, it represent that the good performance of the corporate governance will tend to choose equity carve-outs method, the consequence is similar with the other countries, but the statistical value is not significant.

頁次
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 4
第二節 研究範圍與流程 5
第貳章 文獻探討 6
第一節 企業分割之定義與類型 6
第二節 企業分割後績效表現及其影響因素之相關文獻 8
第三節 影響企業選擇分割方式之因素相關文獻 16
第參章 研究方法 19
第一節 研究假說之建立 19
第二節 變數衡量 22
第三節 實證分析方法 25
第四節 樣本選取與資料來源 26
第肆章 實證結果與分析 29
第一節 敘述性統計 29
第二節 迴歸分析 31
第伍章 結論與建議 34
第一節 研究結論 35
第二節 研究建議 35
第三節 研究限制 35
參考文獻 36


中文部份:
1.公開資訊觀測站,網址:http//newmops.tse.com.tw/
2.王鈺貞,2011,上市櫃公司股權分割(Equity Carve-Outs)宣告效果及長期
股價績效之表現,國立台北大學會計研究所碩士論文。
3.江馥永,2000,我國上市公司撤資行為之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究
所碩士論文。
4.江雪鈴,2006,資產分割策略之研究,國立台灣科技大學財務金融所碩士論
文。
5.李建然、羅元銘,2002,新上市公司上市後營運績效退原因,財務金融學刊,
第十卷第一期,23-52。
6.林鴻光、許永聲,2009,企業進行現金減資之宣告效果及對其營運績效之影
響,台灣管理學刊,第9卷第2期,185-204。
7.吳春敏,2004,企業分割與簡易上市之實務分析,國立台灣大學財務金融所
碩士論文。
8.洪連盛,2005,我國上市資產分割行為與分割宣告效果之研究,國立政治大
學會計學研究所碩士論文。
9.梁秀芳,2004,資產分割制度的研究,證交資料,第507期,2-38。
10.陳譓伊,2002,資產分割之理論與實務,國立台北大學法律研究所碩士論
文。
11.陳明雅,2008,從台灣集團股探討股權分割之價值創造與資金用途,國立
中正大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
12.黃偉綺,2008,股權分割與資產分割對經營績效的影響,私立銘傳大學國
際企業所碩士論文。
13.黃意茵,2007,影響企業選擇撤資及撤資方式之因素,私立東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
14.劉福運,2011,上市櫃公司股權分割(Equity Carve-Outs)後營運績效之表
現,國立台北大學會計研究所碩士論文。
















英文部份:
1.Ahn,S and Walker,M.D,2007,“Corporate Governance and the Spinoff Decision,”Journal of Corporate Finance 13,76-93.
2.Allen,J.and J.McConnell,1998,“Equity Carve-outs and Managerial
Discretion,”Journal of Finance 53,163-186.
3.Brainard,W.C.and J.Tobin,1968,“Pitfalls in Financial Model
Building, ”American Economic Review 58,99-122.
4.Chen,H.L.and Guo,R.J,2005,“On Corporate Divestiture, ”Financial and Accounting, 24,399-421.
5.Chung,K.H.and S.W.Pruitt,1994,“A Simple Approximation of Tobin's
Q, ”Financial Management 23,70-74.
6.Cusatis,P.J.,Miles,J.A.and Woolridge,J.R,1993,“Restructuring
through spinoffs: The stock market evidence. ”Journal of Financial
Economics 33,293-311.
7.Daley,L.,Mehrotra,V.,and R.Sivakumar,1997,“Corporate focus and
value creation: Evidence from spinoffs, ”Journal of Financial
Economics 45,257-281.
8.Desai,H.and P.Jain,1999,“Firm performance and focus: long-run stock
market performance following spinoffs,”Journal of Financial
Economics 54,75-101.
9.Habib,M.A.,Johnsen,B.D,and N.T.Naik,1997,“Spin-offs and
Information, ”Journal of Financial Intermediation,153-176.
10.Hulburt,H.,Miles,J.,and J.Woolridge,2002,“Value Creation from
Equity Carve-outs,”Financial Management Spring,83-100.
11.Hite,G.and J.Owers,1983,“Security Price Reaction around
Corporate Spin-Off Announcements, ”Journal of Finance Economics
12,409-436.
12.Jensen,M.C. and Meckling, W.H 1976,“Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, ” Journal Financial Economics 3,305-360.
13.Klein,A.,J.Rosenfeld,and W Beranek,1991,“The Two Stages of an
Equity Carves-Out and the Price Response of Parent and Subsidiary
Stock, ”Managerial and Decision Economics 12,449-460.
14.Krishnaswami,S.and V.Subranmaniam,1999,“Information
asymmetry, Valuation ,and the corporate spin-off decision,“Journal
of Financial Economics,73-112.
15.Lyon,J.,Barber,B.M.,and C.L,Tsai,1999,“Improved methods for test
of long-run abnormal stock returns,”The Journal of Finance,
165-201.
16.Michaely,R. and Shaw,H.H,1995,“The Choice of Going Public: Spin-offs vs. Carve-outs, ”Financial Management,24,5-21.
17.Miles,J.and J.Rosenfeld,1983,“The Effect of Voluntary Spin-off
Announcements on Shareholder Wealth, ”Journal of Finance
38,1597-1606.
18.Mulherin,H.and A.Boone,2000,“Comparing Acquisitions and
Divestitures, ”Journal of Corporate Finance,117-139.
19.Myers,S.and N. Majluf,“Corporate Financing and Investment Decision
when Investors do not Have, ”Journal of Financial Economics
13,187-221.
20.Nanda,V.,1991,“On the Good News in Equity Carve-Outs, ”Journal of
Finance 46,1717-1736.
21.Nixon,T.,Roenfeldt,R. and Sicherman,N,2000,“The Choice Between Spin-offs and Sell-offs, ”Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting 14,277-288.
22.Powers,E.,2001,“Spinoffs, Selloffs and Equity Carveouts: An Analysis of Divestiture Method Choice, ” Unpublished Working Paper, University of South Carolina.
23.Powers,E.,2003,“Deciphering the Motives for Equity Carve-outs, ”
Journal of Financial Research 26,31-50.
24.Schipper,K.and A.Smith,1983,“Effects of Reconstructing on
Shareholder Wealth-The Case of Voluntary Spin-Offs, ” Journal of
Financial Economics 12,437-467.
25.Schipper,K.and A.Smith,1986,“A Comparison of Equity Carve-Outs and
Seasoned Equity Offerings, ”Journal of Financial Economics
15,153-186.
26.Seoungpil Ahn,Mark D.Walker,2007,“Corporate governance and the
spinoff decision, ”Journal of Finance 13,76-93.
27.Slovin,M.,M.Sushja,and Steven R. Feeraro,1995,“A Comparison of
Information Conveyed by Equity Carve-outs, Spin-Offs, and Asset
Sell-Offs, ”Journal of Finance Economics 37,89-104.
28.Veld,C.and A.Veld-Merkoulova.2004,“Do spin-offs really create
value? The European case,”Journal of Banking & Finance 28,1111-1135.
29.Vhemmanur,T.and A.Yan,2004,“A theory of corporate spin-offs ”
Journal of Financial Economics 72,259-290.
30.Vijh,A.,1999,“Long Term Returns from Equity Carveouts,”Journal of
Financial Economics 51,273-308.
31.Vijh,A.,2002,“The positive Announcement-Period Returns of equity
Carveouts: Asymmetric Information or Divestiture Gains?,”Journal of
Bussiness 75 (Forthcoming).

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊