多角化策略是否存在折價效果？─流動性溢酬與交叉補貼之取捨

Does Diversification Destroy Firm Value? - Trade-off between Liquidity Premium and Cross-subsidization

劉祐瑜

指導教授 ： 王淑芬

國立交通大學/管理學院/財務金融研究所/碩士(2012年)

https://doi.org/10.6842/NCTU.2012.00244

摘要

過去文獻普遍認為多角化策略對公司價值會產生折價效果，其中原因大多被歸因為部門之間的交叉補貼效果所導致。然而過去文獻都忽略資金流動性的溢酬效應對「多角化折價」的直接影響，因此本研究利用2005到2010年之美國三大交易所─NYSE、Amex與NASDAQ的資料檢視此論點是否存在。結果顯示，公司的流動性溢酬越高的確可減輕多角化策略的折價效果。

關鍵字

多角化 ； 流動性溢酬 ； 交叉補貼效果

並列摘要

Value destruction by diversified firms relative to their focused competitors has been widely studied by prior literatures. This discount effect has been ascribed to many factors; among the most prominent of these explanations is the cross-subsidization effect between divisions resulted in diversified organizational form. However, the value-added effect of liquidity premium has been neglected by previous studies of corporate diversification. In our studies, we use data in the three main security exchanges in the United States, which are NYSE, Amex and NASDAQ in 2005 to 2010 for examining this contention. Our key finding is that higher level of liquidity premium mitigates diversification discount effect on firm value.

並列關鍵字

Diversification ； liquidity premium ； Cross-subsidization effect

參考文獻

Acharya, V., Almeida, H., Campello, M., “Is cash negative debt? A hedging perspective on corporate financial policies,” Journal of Financial Intermediation, 16, pp. 515–554, 2007.

Aggarwal, R.K., Samwick, A.A., “Why do managers diversify their firms? Agency reconsidered,” Journal of Finance, 58 (1), pp. 71–118, 2003.

Almeida, H., Campello, M., Weisbach, M., “The cash flow sensitivity of cash,” Journal of Finance, 59, pp. 1777–1804, 2004.

Ammann, M., Hoechle, D., Schmid, M., “Is there really no conglomerate discount?” Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 39(1) & (2), pp. 264–288, 2012.

Bates, T., Kahle, K., Stulz, R., “Why do U.S. firms hold so much more cash than they used to?” Journal of Finance, 64, pp. 1985–2021, 2009.