South Asian Journal of Management

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

An Assessment of the Role of IPO Grades in Improving Investor Confidence:Evidence from India


Affiliations
1 Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhawan , Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
2 Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhawan, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
3 Department of Economics and Finance, Room No.: 6165 N - NAB, Birla Institute of Technology & Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus, Vidya Vihar, Pilani 333031, Rajasthan, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


SEBI introduced mandatory grading of Initial Public Offers (IPO) in 2007 to enhance information symmetry between issuing companies and investors in the primary market, particularly for retail investors, increasing overall investor participation and ensuring pricing efficiency. However, in December 2013, SEBI scrapped mandatory grading and made it an optional exercise; this event signals that mandatory IPO grading failed to meet its objectives. This paper attempts to analyze the impact of mandatory grading of IPO in promoting investor confidence by analyzing all graded IPO offered during the mandatory grading regime (2007- 2013) using regression analysis. Results indicate that IPO grades have a significant influence on retail demand; also, high graded issues attract demand from across all investor categories. Further, high graded IPO seem to be priced efficiently as compared to others. Overall, this study suggests that this provision should have been retained, especially in the interest of retail investors.

Keywords

India Investor Confidence, Long-run Performance, Mandatory IPO Grading, Pricing Efficiency.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • Agarwal, S., Liu, C., & Rhee, S. G. (2008). Investor demand for IPO and aftermarket performance: Evidence from the Hong Kong stock market. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 18(2), 176-190.

  • Allen, F., & Faulhaber, G. R. (1989). Signalling by underpricing in the IPO market. Journal of Financial Economics, 23(2), 303-323.

  • An, H. H., & Chan, K. C. (2008). Credit ratings and IPO pricing. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(5), 584595.

  • Benveniste, L., & Spindt, P. (1989). How investment bankers determine the offer price and allocation of new issues. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 343- 361.

  • Bhole, L. M., & Mahakud, J. (2008). Financial Institutions and Markets–Structure. Growth and Innovations, McGrawHill, New Delhi.

  • Bozzolan, S., & Ipino, E. (2007) Information Asymmetries and IPO Underpricing: The Role of Voluntary Disclosure of Forward-Looking Information in the Prospectus (July 10, 2007). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=999518 or http:// dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.999518

  • Chemmanur, T. J. (1993). The pricing of initial public offerings: A dynamic model with information production. The Journal of Finance, 48(1), 285-304.

  • Deb, S. S., & Marisetty, V. B. (2010). Information content of IPO grading. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(9), 2294-2305.

  • Dhamija, S., & Arora, R. K. (2017a). Impact of quality certification on IPO underpricing: evidence from India. Global Business Review, 18(2), 428-444.

  • Dhamija, S., & Arora, R. K. (2017b). Determinants of Long-run Performance of Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from India. Vision, 21(1), 35-45.

  • DuCharme, L. L., Malatesta, P. H., & Sefcik, S. E. (2001). Earnings management: IPO valuation and subsequent performance. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 16(4), 369-396.

  • Ghosh, S. (2005). Underpricing of initial public offerings: The Indian experience. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 41(6), 45-57.

  • Jacob, J., & Agarwalla, S. K. (2015). Mandatory IPO grading: does it help pricing efficiency? Vikalpa, 40(2), 132-144.

  • Jain, B. A., & Kini, O. (1994). The post issue operating performance of IPO firms. The Journal of Finance, 49(5), 1699-1726

  • Kaur, A., & Singh, B. (2017). Examining SEBI’s Edict: Mandatory to Voluntary IPO Grading. Management and Labour Studies, 42(2), 79-87.

  • Khan, M. Y. (2013). Financial Services. In M. Y. Khan, Financial Services (pp. 17.18 - 17.20). Delhi: McGraw Hill Education.

  • Khurshed, A., Paleari, S., Pande, A., & Vismara, S. (2014). Transparent book building, certification and initial public offerings. Journal of Financial Markets, 19, 154-169.

  • Krishnamurti, C., Thong, T. Y., & Vishwanath, S. R. (2009). Does certification work in emerging markets? Evidence from the Indian IPO market. In Proceedings of the 2009 JCF Conference on Emerging Market Corporate Finance.

  • Lee, P. J., Taylor, S. L., & Walter, T. S. (1999). IPO underpricing explanations: Implications from investor application and allocation schedules. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 34(04), 425-444.

  • Lee, P. M., and Wahal, S. (2004). Grandstanding, certification and the underpricing of venture capital backed IPO. Journal of Financial Economics, 73(2), 375-407.

  • Loughran, T., & Ritter, J. R. (2002). Why don’t issuers get upset about leaving money on the table in IPO? Review of Financial Studies, 15(2), 413-444.

  • Marisetty, V. B., & Subrahmanyam, M. G. (2010). Group affiliation and the performance of IPOs in the Indian stock market. Journal of Financial Markets, 13(1), 196-223.

  • Megginson, W. L., & Weiss, K. A. (1991). Venture capitalist certification in initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 46, 879-903.

  • Neupane, S., & Poshakwale, S. S. (2012). Transparency in IPO mechanism: Retail investors’ participation, IPO pricing and returns. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(7), 2064-2076.

  • Pathak, B. V. (2011). The Indian Financial System: Markets, Institutions and Services. In B. V. Pathak, The Indian Financial System: Markets, Institutions and Services (p. 691). Delhi: Pearson.

  • Poudyal, S. (2008). Grading Initial Public Offerings (IPO) in India’s Capital Markets: A Globally Unique Concept. Working Paper No. 2008-12-08. IIM, Ahmedabad

  • Rock, K. (1986). Why new issues are underpriced. Journal of Financial Economics, 15(1), 187-212.

  • Ritter, J. R. (1991). The longrun performance of initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 46(1), 3-27.

  • Saha, S. S. (2006). SEBI’s Initiative to Safeguard Investors’ interest through IPO Grading. The Chartered Accountant, 55(7), 116-122.

  • Sahoo, B. P., & Kaur, K. (2017).The movement of IPOs in Indian stock market and IPO grading. Asian Journal of Management, 8(4), 1057-1063.

  • SEBI. (2014, February 4). SEBI was of the view that IPO grading had not served the intended purpose and therefore, mandatory IPO grading may be discontinued. The Hindu Business Line.Retrieved from https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/markets/stock-markets/sebi-makes-public-issue-grading-optional/article23157374.ece

  • Subramanyam, P. G. (2008). Investment Banking: concepts, analyses and cases. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

  • Tandon, B. B., & Vashisht, A. K. (2002), Financial Sector Reforms: An Unfinished Agenda for Economic Development. Deep and Deep Publications.

  • Titman, S., & Trueman, B. (1986). Information quality and the valuation of new issues. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 8(2), 159-172.

  • Welch, I. (1989). Seasoned offerings, imitation costs and the underpricing of initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 44(2), 421-449.


Abstract Views: 189

PDF Views: 0




  • An Assessment of the Role of IPO Grades in Improving Investor Confidence:Evidence from India

Abstract Views: 189  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Smita Kashiramka
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhawan , Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
Nisha Mary Thomas
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhawan, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
Surendra Singh Yadav
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhawan, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
N. V. Muralidar Rao
Department of Economics and Finance, Room No.: 6165 N - NAB, Birla Institute of Technology & Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus, Vidya Vihar, Pilani 333031, Rajasthan, India

Abstract


SEBI introduced mandatory grading of Initial Public Offers (IPO) in 2007 to enhance information symmetry between issuing companies and investors in the primary market, particularly for retail investors, increasing overall investor participation and ensuring pricing efficiency. However, in December 2013, SEBI scrapped mandatory grading and made it an optional exercise; this event signals that mandatory IPO grading failed to meet its objectives. This paper attempts to analyze the impact of mandatory grading of IPO in promoting investor confidence by analyzing all graded IPO offered during the mandatory grading regime (2007- 2013) using regression analysis. Results indicate that IPO grades have a significant influence on retail demand; also, high graded issues attract demand from across all investor categories. Further, high graded IPO seem to be priced efficiently as compared to others. Overall, this study suggests that this provision should have been retained, especially in the interest of retail investors.

Keywords


India Investor Confidence, Long-run Performance, Mandatory IPO Grading, Pricing Efficiency.

References