• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Most of the time, the issuance of new securities in the Stock Exchange of Thailand particularly follows the researches and statistics in other leading markets.

However, there are some hypotheses that cannot be tested due to data availability, and several of them do not have sufficient evidence to reject the null hypotheses. There are some good implications and interpretations from the previous chapter that should be highlighted for investors and firms that are going to issue new security on the way to optimize their SEO.

SEO, regardless of the event whether to use announcement or issuance date, gives a negative abnormal return to the stock performance of -0.6%, significance at 1%.

The trend continues to the long-run. However, with the limitation of BHAR, the magnitude of long-term abnormal return might not be realistic; in reality, investor may cut losses before they realize a very low stock performance (lower than -100%). From empirical study, it can be concluded that investors are more proactive to the news announcement rather than the actual date firm distribute newly issued stocks.

Both PP and XRS have better performance vs. PO and XRW. However, XRS is the best when investors decide to buy the securities and hold them over the long- run. With statistical inference, XRS returns at -11.0% vs. -23.1% PP and -28.5% XRW for 1-year BHAR. In terms of industry analysis, Service and Financial Industries perform better than Industrial and Property & Construction Industries.

It is also summarized that the higher the offering dilution is, the lower the return will be. SEO’s announced or issued during the Bull market gives higher return vs. those announced or issued during the Bear market during 6 months to 1 year.

Nevertheless, it might not be logical to use long-run comparison to summarize the effects from stock market as there can be many factors impacting to the performances.

For PP, dividend-SEO has higher abnormal return versus non-dividend paying firm, but the results are opposite for XRS and XRW. Previous researches did not

study the detailed level of offering type, but the contradiction in rights offering to the previous study is supported by Pecking Order, Information Asymmetry and Irrelevancy Theories. No matter what the characteristics of SEO are, XRS has less negative return than that of XRW.

From Microstructure analysis, individual investors will buy the newly issued stocks from foreigners and institutional investors. All of the investors prefer PP rather than PO, XRS and XRW. There is no enough evidence to conclude that the secondary SEOs have higher abnormal return than that of primary SEOs for all offering types. Thai investors may perceive SEO indifferently; whether it is the first time or not, SEO is still a negative signal.

Liquidity plays a crucial role to identify the performance of SEO issuing firms. The firms with lower liquidity (as measured by quick ratio, current ratio, cash ratio, and cash conversion cycle) tends to perform worse. Firms need to attractively discount the SEO a lot to compensate for the risks investors have to bear, this contributes a lower return for firms with lower quick ratio. However, Market liquidity (as measured by stocks turnover: number of shares bought or sold per total number of shares outstanding) does not play significant effect in SET. Thai Stock Market is dominated by high stock turnover firms, accounting for >75%, which make other tertiles become statistically insignificant.

Smaller listed firms (the first tertile of market capitalization) perform better once they issue new stocks irrespective to SEO offering types. This contradicts with previous researches, but is supported by risk-return tradeoff theory, Gibrat’s Law, Internal Finance Theory of Growth, and the potential to grow of the smaller firms.

Long-term study is defined as 5 years in this research. Under this window, the abnormal return is still negative. As the drawback of using BHAR was mentioned earlier, future study can cover the scope of changing benchmark market return calculation method, or can even explore longer event window.

Table 6.1 Summary of Results – Evidence from the Stock Exchange of Thailand

Hypothesis Expected Outcome Results

Impact of SEO Announcement Date (-) Issuance Date (-)

Accept

Note: The magnitude of impact is more on the announcement date rather than the issuance date

SEO Offering Type PP > PO, XRS and XRW

Reject

Note: XRS > PP > XRW > PO

Dilution Effect

Higher offering dilution gives more negative return

Accept

Market Effect (SET

Index) Bull > Bear Inconclusive

Dividend Effect

Dividend-paying SEO firm > Non dividend- paying SEO firm

Inconclusive

Note: Likelihood, PP: True and XRS & XRW: False

Rights Offering Type XRW > XRS Reject

Investor Type Impact (Microstructure)

Institutional Investors

> Foreigners or Individuals

Inconclusive (Insufficient Information)

Note:

1) Individuals are net-buyer, while institutions and foreigners are net-seller.

2) Investors prefer PP.

Primary vs. Secondary

SEO SSEO > FSEO

Inconclusive:

Note: Likelihood, PO and XRS:

True, PP and XRW: False Firms’ Liquidity

Effect

(Quick Ratio)

High > Low Accept

Table 6.1 Summary of Results – Evidence from the Stock Exchange of Thailand (cont.)

Hypothesis Expected Outcome Results

Firms’ Liquidity Effect

(Current Ratio)

High > Low Accept

Firms’ Liquidity Effect

(Cash Ratio)

High > Low Accept

Firms’ Liquidity Effect

(Cash Conversion Cycle)

High > Low Accept

Market’s Liquidity Effect

(Stock Turnover)

High > Low Reject

Note: Low > High Firm Size Impact

(Market Capitalization)

Large > Medium >

Small

Reject

Note: Small > Medium > Large

Long-term Study of

SEO Long-term > Short-term

Inconclusive

Note: BHAR Bias may result in more negative stock return over the long-run. Need to study other approach or even longer window post SEO.

Table 6.1 summarizes all of the test results from all hypotheses. Some are True, some are false and some are inconclusive. Please be noted that this is the result of the Stock Exchange of Thailand during 1999 – 2014.