292 B.E. Eckbo et al.
underwriter market share, underwriter reputation and analyst quality can explain this
phenomenon. As discussed earlier in the SEO underpricing section,Corwin (2003)also
explores many of these issues. In addition,Butler, Grullon, and Weston (2005b)find
that the underwriter spreads are negatively related to a wide range of stock liquidity
measures, whileAltinkilic (2006)reports that spreads are directly related to market
making effort.
3.11. Miscellaneous offerings
3.11.1. Global offerings
Global issues are often sold through an ADR or GDR mechanism to minimize foreign
exchange issues for foreign investors. Under these mechanisms, a depository bank holds
the original stock and issues new shares that are denominated in local currency and pays
cash dividends in the local currency. Global offerings by U.S. firms generally use the
GDR mechanism. The supply of ADRs or GDRs can be expanded or contracted by the
depository bank purchasing more shares of stock or selling back some of its sharehold-
ings with the creation or redemption of a like number of claims to these shares through
the issuance or redemption of ADRs/GDRs. Foreign issuers selling shares in the U.S.
must register their securities under Rule 144A as is discussed in greater detail below.
The implication of cross listing of its stock on firm value is studied byDoidge,
Karolyi, and Stulz (2004). They argue that cross-listing in the United States helps con-
trolling shareholders of foreign firms commit to limit their expropriation of minority
shareholders, since U.S. security laws are stricter than most other jurisdictions. They
also argue that cross-listing increases the ability of these firms to raise equity capital at
more attractive terms, allowing the firms to take advantage of their growth opportuni-
ties. They show supporting evidence in that foreign companies with shares cross-listed
in the U.S. had market to book ratios (at the end of 1997) that were 16.5 percent higher
than that of non-cross listed firms from the same country, and that growth opportuni-
ties are more highly valued for firms that cross-list from countries with weaker investor
rights (also, seeLaPorta, Lopez-de-Silanes, and Shleifer, 1999).^20
Ljungqvist, Jenkinson, and Wilhelm (2003)examine the tradeoff between investor
demand estimation methods (book building versus fixed-price) and the costs associated
with hiring an underwriter for initial public offerings (IPOs). Book building conditions
the final issue price on market demand conditions, whereas in case of a fixed-price
method, shares are priced first and then later put up for subscription. Using a dataset
containing 2,143 IPOs by issuers from 65 countries outside the United States during
January 1992–July 1999, they show that book building, when used in combination with
U.S. banks (as underwriters) and U.S. investors, can reduce underpricing significantly
relative to fixed-price offerings or book building efforts by other banks. They attribute
(^20) For a more recent survey of the literature on cross-listings, seeKarolyi (2006).