IPOs and Product Quality

By Neal M. Stoughton, Kit Pong Wong, Josef Zechner. 2001

182 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Media Technology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1f10973d1a6d80c9391712a3c9d8e278c4b5048e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

1. Thomas J. Chemmanur
2. Alexander P. Ljungqvist
3. Jeffrey A. Pittman
4. William J. Wilhelm
5. Jie He
6. James C. Brau
7. M. Pagano
8. Elizabeth Demers

In Media Technology

1. Thomas J. Chemmanur

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Thomas J. Chemmanur
2. Jeffrey A. Pittman
3. M. Pagano
4. Alexander P. Ljungqvist
5. Jörg Rocholl

Citations in the corpus

• The Choice of IPO versus Takeover: Empirical Evidence* (2003, background): “, Travlos (1987), and Amihud, Lev, and Travlos (1990), Martin (1996) and Ang and Kohers (2001)).”
• IPO Pricing in the Dot-Com Bubble (2003, background): “Stoughton et al. (2001) formalize this idea in a model where highquality firms distinguish themselves, and thereby build product market share, by incurring the indirect cost of underpricing and subjecting themselves to the scrutiny of secondary market investors engaged in costly information producti”
• The Marketing Role of Ipos: Evidence from Internet Stocks (2003, background): “Stoughton et al. (2001) model the interaction between consumers and investors of a start-up firm that introduces a new product to consumers.”
• IPO waves, product market competition, and the going public decision: Theory and evidence (2011, background): “…efficiency in grabbing market share (2008), who analyze the relationship between product market advertising and new equity issues (IPOs and SEOs), and Stoughton, Wong, and Zechner (2001), who argue that the decision of a firm to go public may serve to signal high quality to the product market.”
• What Makes Stock Exchanges Succeed? Evidence from Cross-Listing Decisions (2001, background): “Failing to do so might put the company at a competitive disadvantage in the industry – a point made by Stoughton, Wong and Zechner (1999) with reference to domestic listings.”
• Rational IPO Waves (2005, unknown): “For other information-based models, see Persons and Warther (1997), Chemmanur and Fulghieri (1999), Subrahmanyam and Titman (1999), Stoughton, Wong, and Zechner (2001), Lowry and Schwert (2002), Benveniste, Busaba, and Wilhelm (2002), and Alti (2003).”
• Auditor choice and the cost of debt capital for newly public firms (2004, background): “Prior research suggests that firms going public reveal information about potential market size or new product quality; if this news is favorable, then rivals in the industry follow; e.g., Stoughton et al. (2001) and Maksimovic and Pichler (2001).”
• The New Game in Town: Competitive Effects of IPOs (2010, background): “Higher quality firms are more likely to go public than lower quality firms, as Stoughton, Wong, and Zechner (2001) suggest.”