유통 상장기업들의 자본조달 특징에 관한 연구 (A Study on the Financing Decision of Retail Firms Listed on Korean Stock Markets)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국유통과학회
· 수록지 정보 : 유통과학연구 / 12권 / 10호 / 75 ~ 83페이지
· 저자명 : 윤보현

초록

Purpose -This article aims to examine whether the stock is – -suance of firms in the retail industry follows Myers’ (1984) peck-ing order theory, which is based on information asymmetry.
According to the pecking order model, firms have a sequence offinancing decisions, of which the first choice is to use retainedearnings, the second one is to get into safe debt, the next in-volves risky debt, and the last involves finance with outsideequity. Since the 2000s, the polarization of the LEs (Large enter-prises) and SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises) arose in theretail industry. The LEs exhibited an improvement in growth andprofitability, whereas SMEs had a tendency to degenerate. Thisstudy contributes to corroborating the features of financing deci-sions in the retail industry distinguished from the other industries.
Research design, data, and methodology-This study considers the stocks listed on the KOSPI and KOSDAQ markets from1991 to 2013, and is more concentrated on the stocks in the re-tail industry. The data were collected from the financial in-formation company, WISEfn. The empirical analysis is conductedby employing two measures of net equity issues (and), whichwere introduced in Fama and French (2005), and can be calcu-lated from firms’ accounting information. All variables are gen-erated as the aggregate value of the numerator divided by ag-gregate assets, which, in effect, treats the entire sample as asingle firm. Substantially, the financing decisions of the firms wereanalyzed by examining how often and under what circumstancesfirms issue and repurchase equity. Then, this study compares thefeatures of the retail industry with those of the other industries.
Results -The proportion of sample firms that show annual –net stock issues reaching the level of the year’s average was54.33% for the 1990s, and fell to 39.93% per year for the2000s. In detail, the fraction of the small firms actually in-creases from 45.08% to 51.04%, whereas that of large firmsshows a dramatic decline from 58.94% to 24.76%. Considering the fact that the large firms’ rapid increase in growth after the2000s may lead to an increase in equity issues, this result israther surprising. Meanwhile, net stock repurchases of assetsare considerably disproportionate between the large (-50.11%)and the small firms ( 15.66%) for the 2000s.
Conclusions -Stock issuance of retail firms is not in line with –the traditional seasoned equity offering based on informationasymmetry. The net stock issuance of the small firms in the re-tail industry can be interpreted as part of an effort to reorganizebusiness and solicit new investment to resolve degeneratingbusiness performance. For large firms, on the other hand, thenet repurchase can be regarded as part of an effort to rearrangebusiness for efficiency and amplifying synergy across businesssections through spin-off. These results can help the governmentestablish a support policy on retail industry according to size.

영어초록

Purpose -This article aims to examine whether the stock is – -suance of firms in the retail industry follows Myers’ (1984) peck-ing order theory, which is based on information asymmetry.
According to the pecking order model, firms have a sequence offinancing decisions, of which the first choice is to use retainedearnings, the second one is to get into safe debt, the next in-volves risky debt, and the last involves finance with outsideequity. Since the 2000s, the polarization of the LEs (Large enter-prises) and SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises) arose in theretail industry. The LEs exhibited an improvement in growth andprofitability, whereas SMEs had a tendency to degenerate. Thisstudy contributes to corroborating the features of financing deci-sions in the retail industry distinguished from the other industries.
Research design, data, and methodology-This study considers the stocks listed on the KOSPI and KOSDAQ markets from1991 to 2013, and is more concentrated on the stocks in the re-tail industry. The data were collected from the financial in-formation company, WISEfn. The empirical analysis is conductedby employing two measures of net equity issues (and), whichwere introduced in Fama and French (2005), and can be calcu-lated from firms’ accounting information. All variables are gen-erated as the aggregate value of the numerator divided by ag-gregate assets, which, in effect, treats the entire sample as asingle firm. Substantially, the financing decisions of the firms wereanalyzed by examining how often and under what circumstancesfirms issue and repurchase equity. Then, this study compares thefeatures of the retail industry with those of the other industries.
Results -The proportion of sample firms that show annual –net stock issues reaching the level of the year’s average was54.33% for the 1990s, and fell to 39.93% per year for the2000s. In detail, the fraction of the small firms actually in-creases from 45.08% to 51.04%, whereas that of large firmsshows a dramatic decline from 58.94% to 24.76%. Considering the fact that the large firms’ rapid increase in growth after the2000s may lead to an increase in equity issues, this result israther surprising. Meanwhile, net stock repurchases of assetsare considerably disproportionate between the large (-50.11%)and the small firms ( 15.66%) for the 2000s.
Conclusions -Stock issuance of retail firms is not in line with –the traditional seasoned equity offering based on informationasymmetry. The net stock issuance of the small firms in the re-tail industry can be interpreted as part of an effort to reorganizebusiness and solicit new investment to resolve degeneratingbusiness performance. For large firms, on the other hand, thenet repurchase can be regarded as part of an effort to rearrangebusiness for efficiency and amplifying synergy across businesssections through spin-off. These results can help the governmentestablish a support policy on retail industry according to size.

참고자료

· 없음