1. Corporate Diversification and Long-run Performance of SEO Firms --Evidence from Taiwan-- Jeng-Ren Chiou Ming-Yuan Li Ting-Kai Chou Chao-Ya Wan

2. Outline 1. Introduction 2. Hypothesis Development 3. Data and Empirical Design 4. Empirical Results Analysis 5. Conclusions

3. Introduction  A large and growing literature examines the consequences of corporate diversification.  diversified firms sell at a discount relative to focused firms.  stock prices tend to fall when firms announce focus- decreasing corporate actions.  The prior evidence suggests that the costs of corporate diversification exceed the benefits.

4. Introduction  Recent papers try to identify some of the costs of diversification by examining the investment patterns of diversified firms.  Scharfstein (1998)  Rajan, Servaes and Zingales (2000)  Cross-subsidization phenomenon  A conglomerate firm always invest more in weak division than their stand-alone industry peers.  diversified firms would invest more in relatively poorer projects than focused firms

5. Introduction  There is little empirical work that directly identifies the benefits of diversification.  Lewellen (1971) - coinsurance effects increase a diversified firms’ debt capacity relative to the aggregate debt capacity of its individual divisions as stand-alone firms.  Williamson (1975), Stein (1997), Lamont (1997) and Shin and Stulz (1998) - internal capital market and efficiently allocating cash across divisions.

6. Research Objective  We try to provide evidence on the potential benefits associated with corporate diversification  examine the effect of diversification on subsequent performance following the equity issues.  The direction of relationship between diversification and post-SEO performance is unclear.

7. Hypotheses Development  Internal capital market hypothesis  In diversified firms, profitable product lines can allocate much needed capital to negative cash flow businesses.  There may also be positive synergies between the lines of businesses of the issuing firms.  Under the assumptions of efficient internal capital markets and/or synergies, we would expect a positive relationship between diversification and post-SEO long run performance.

8. Hypotheses Development  Resource misallocation hypothesis  Berger and Ofek (1995) provide an exposition on how corporate diversification can decrease firm value.  There may be a higher propensity for the misallocation of capital across business segments through inefficient cross-subsidization in a diversified firm.  Rajan, Servaes, and Zingales (2000)  Scharfstein and Stein (2000).  We expect a negative relationship between diversification and post-SEO long run performance.

9. Data  Seasoned equity offerings on the Taiwan Securities Exchange over 1995-2002.  exclude financial companies and firms without complete data.  A total of 386 equity issues remain after our selection criteria. Number of SEOs issued in the period 1995 to 2002 on the Taiwan Securities Exchange507 Less: utilities and financial firms(54) Less: missing data on stock returns within 3 years after the SEO(35) Number of firms conducting SEO with complete returns in the sample period418 Less: missing data on diversification calculation-related variables(12) Less: missing data on regression control variables(20) Sample 386 Sample Selection

10. Sample Distribution by Year  Most of the offerings occur in the 1996-1998 periods.  Due to the economic recession in Taiwan capital markets, only five offerings conducted in 2001.

11. Sample Distribution by Industry  The SEO sample varies by industry from 143 offerings in the electronics classification to 1 offering from automobile industry.

12. Methodology  Buy-and-Hold Abnormal Returns (BHAR)  BHAR represents the monthly compounding return for issuing firm from a buy and hold strategy, adjusted by the holding period return on the benchmark during the corresponding period.  size-matched portfolio  B/M-matched portfolio  size-and-B/M-matched portfolio

13. Methodology  Measure of Diversification (1)  Herfindahl index (HINDEX) - reflects the degree to which the sales of a firm are concentrated within its divisions.  The variable HINDEX equals 1 for all single- segment firms and is less than 1 for multiple- segment firms.  Smaller levels of HINDEX correspond to less industry focus and greater diversification.

14. Methodology  Measure of Diversification (2)  Diversification Dummy (DIV) - identify whether a firm has multiple segments or not.  The DIV equals 1 if the firm has multiple segments, and 0 otherwise.

15. MeanStd.Q1MedianQ3 Number of Segments 2.1011.145123 Rev.-based Herfindahl Index 0.7810.2370.5570.8801.000 Offering price (NT$) 37.59430.591202842 Issue Size (million NT$)436.0291038.61060.000117.545307.294 Total assets (billion NT$)10.20616.1282.6694.9289.940 Market value (billion NT$)17.41438.8343.7866.74614.542 Book-to-market ratio0.4170.2370.2440.3670.547 Age5.8298.483026 Hot market0.6550.476011 R&D expense ratio (%)1.4072.1820.0000.4702.100 Tobin Q2.3371.8061.3871.8052.531 Subsequent SEO activity0.6840.466011 Debt ratio0.4410.1460.3540.4530.549 Return on assets (%)8.4316.9984.2307.17010.780 Cash flow/total assets (%)2.80711.390-1.9463.6718.764 We find that SEO issuers, on average, have two segments. The mean Herfindahl index is 0.781. The mean gross proceeds are 436.03 million NT dollars or US$ 13.03 million. Compared with other developed capital market like the U.S., and Japan, gross proceed for Taiwan SEOs are much smaller. Empirical Results -Summary Statistics of SEOs-

16. Empirical Results -Post-SEO Long-run Performance-  Taiwan SEO firms don’t exhibit long run under-performance  The result is robust to various benchmarks

17. Single firms (N=136) Multi-Segments firms (N=250) Single-Segment firms vs. Multi-Segments firms MeanMedianMeanMedian Diff. in Mean Diff. in Median Number of segments1.000 2.7002.000 -26.80 *** Rev.-based Herfindahl Index1.000 0.6620.627 24.77 *** 0.373 Offering price (NT$)41.40529.50035.52127.000 1.71 * 2.500 Issue Size (million NT$)484.368128.000409.733105.250 0.6722.750 Total assets (billion NT$)8.1304.19611.3365.215 -2.11 ** -1.019 Market value (billion NT$)17.2006.50617.5316.827 -0.08-0.321 Book-to-market ratio0.3990.3540.4270.370 -1.07-0.016 Age3.9411.0006.8563.000 -3.61 *** -2.000 Hot market0.5811.0000.6961.000 -2.23 ** 0.000 R&D expense ratio (%)1.8400.4501.1730.475 2.49 ** -0.025 Tobin Q2.6481.9202.1681.765 2.20 ** 0.155 Subsequent SEO activity0.7281.0000.6601.000 1.370.000 Debt ratio0.4260.4320.4490.461 -1.49-0.029 Tech industry0.4120.0000.3480.000 1.240.000 Empirical Results -Summary Stat. by Issuer- Type- Relative to focused issuers, the diversified issuers have lower offering price and R&D intensity, but have longer listing history and larger assets amounts.

18. Univariate Comparisons The 3-year period buy-and-hold abnormal returns for single-segment SEO firms show significant underperformance phenomenon. The result is robust to various benchmarks including size-matched, B/M matched, and size-and-B/M matched portfolios. However, the post-issue buy-and-hold abnormal returns for multiple- segment SEO firms show significant outperformance. The result is also robust to various benchmarks. A test that the mean post-issue performance for single- and multiple-segment issuers are equal is rejected at 1% level.

19. Regression Results 1.The coefficient on HINDEX is negative and highly significant. Since increases in HINDEX represent increases in focus, it appears that equity-issue conducted by more focused firms occur more negative long-run performance. 2.The result supports the internal capital market hypothesis.

20. Regression Results -Endogeneity Consideration- 1.Campa and Kedia (2002) suggests that firms that choose to diversify are not a random sample of firms. If this case, the estimation results using OLS will be biased. 2.We attempt to use simultaneous equation for model 1 to control for the endogeneity, and use Heckman’s (1979) two stage procedure to control for the self-selection of firms that diversify. 3.The empirical results show that there still exists a significant positive relationship between diversification and post-issue performance.

21. Summary  This paper is the first to examine the effect of corporate diversification on the equity issue performance.  We find that equity issues by diversified firm results in better subsequent stock price performance than equity issues by comparable focused firms.  These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that diversification improve the efficiency of internal capital-allocation process.

22. Thanks for Your Listening & Comments Welcome !!