MSG Team's other articles

10651 The Planning Fallacy

Investors are used to looking at projections of future events. They commonly use projections about future cash flows, future profits, and even future dividends in order to make investing decisions. However, a lot of the time, the projections that they use are overly optimistic. This leads them to make bad investing decisions. This problem of […]

10004 Internet Only Banks

Concept of Internet Only Banks With the advent of internet banking, a large part of the services that are offered by banks can be provided online as well. Therefore, a lot of entrepreneurs were of the opinion that brick and mortar banks have become obsolete in retail banking just as brick and mortar stores have […]

10396 The Sinister Motive Behind Cashless Society

Cashless society is the latest buzzword in global finance. At the present moment, only 15% to 20% of the world’s money exists in the form of currency notes. This itself is an absurdity. However, many central banks and governments all across the world have pledged to bring the cash percentage down to zero. This means […]

12714 Changing Cost Structure in the Retail Industry

The retail industry has undergone a lot of changes in the recent past. Each of these changes have been strategic in nature. As a result, their impact has been more or less permanent. This impact can be seen and felt in many ways across the entire retail organization. One of the ways in which this […]

9641 How Loss Aversion Affects Investment Decisions

Behavioral financial analysts have conducted a significant amount of research in order to understand how investors process loss. In the process, they have found out that most investors have an innate aversion to losses. This causes them to make wrong decisions while investing. In this article, we will have a closer look at what loss […]

Search with tags

  • No tags available.

Every year investment bankers help several companies raise capital from the markets. They help these companies in issuing securities and accessing more funds. The issue is that when these companies access the capital markets, they are often growing at a phenomenal pace. This means that these firms have a lot of projects where they want to make investments.

However, traditional sources of funding, such as promoter’s equity as well as bank loans, are unable to meet their funding needs. Hence, the firms often access the capital markets in a hurry.

It has been empirically proven that when these companies sell their securities, they often price themselves less. This means that there is significant underpricing at play when IPO’s are issued. This means that the companies issuing securities are leaving money on the table! It is amazing that such a trend is emerging despite the fact that capital markets all over the world are competitive, and hence any pricing discrepancies should immediately get corrected.

In this article, we will understand why IPOs are often underpriced and the role that investment bankers play in it.

There have been formal studies that have been conducted by many organizations to help zero down the reason behind the underpricing of IPOs. The four major reasons that have been listed in these studies are discussed below:

  1. Monopoly of Investment Bankers: Many studies have argued that since investment banks had a monopoly on the underwriting of shares, the issues were being underpriced. This is because the investment banker has an incentive to underprice the shares. If the price of shares is sold below the market price, then the investment banker has a higher probability that they will be able to sell all the shares easily. However, if the issue is fairly priced, there is always a chance that all the shares might not be sold off at once.

    Hence, pursuant to the underwriting clause, the investment bank will have to hold on to some of the shares on their books. This would mean that their own capital gets locked, and they have to undertake the risks. This is the reason that investment bankers deliberately underprice their shares. Investment bankers have been arguing that this is incorrect. This is because it is not true that they hold a monopoly over the underwriting of shares anymore.

    Ever since the Glass Steagall Act has been repealed, commercial banks, foreign banks, and a wide variety of institutions have the ability to underwrite shares. Hence, the competition amongst various underwriters should ideally eliminate the underpricing of shares.

  2. Protection from Lawsuits: Investment bankers have another incentive to underprice the IPOs. The regulations related to securities issues in many countries make the investment bankers liable for any type of misinformation and the financial losses arising from the same.

    Hence, if it is proven in court that the investors were sold an overpriced issue, the investment bankers could face a huge liability.

    To counter this, investment bankers inherently assume that the directors of the selling company are not giving them 100% correct information. Hence, they deliberately lower the valuation and keep a spread for themselves and underprice the shares. This is so that even if adverse information is found out, later on, the investment bankers can still argue that even with new information, the issue is not overpriced, and hence, they shouldn’t be liable to pay damages to the shareholders.

    However, the fact remains that in order to protect themselves from the lawsuits, the underwriters do have an incentive to provide a lower valuation to the shares.

  3. Information Asymmetry: Another reason which has been mentioned by many studies is the fact that huge information asymmetry exists during an IPO. When an IPO process is announced, the investors are buying into a relatively unknown commodity.

    The business of the company has been private until then, and hence their financial performance is also not disclosed to the public. The IPO process does make it mandatory to disclose financials for the past few years. However, there is still a huge information asymmetry. This is the reason that the bidding shareholders always bid a lower price. This is because they will bid on many IPOs on average. Some issues will turn out to be overpriced.

    Hence, to be conservative, investors bid a lower price on an IPO. The selling company is also aware of this issue. However, they do not seem to protest because once the IPO has been issued and found to be worthwhile, the investing community provides a better valuation to the subsequent public offerings. Hence, it can be said that underpricing is a kind of premium that the company has to pay to induce the investors to bet their money on an unknown company.

  4. Insider Outsider Theory: The insider-outsider theory assumes that underpricing is the best strategy given the asymmetry. This is because if the issue is underpriced, insiders will buy it because they know its true value. At the same time, outsiders will buy it thinking that it is at least the fair value.

    When the market corrects and prices rise, both insiders, as well as outsiders, stand to gain. On the other hand, if the issue is overpriced, then neither insiders nor outsiders would want to buy it.

The bottom line is that even though the underpricing of IPOs might seem like an anomaly, it is not. Deliberately underpricing IPOs is a strategy that has been used by many companies as a marketing tool for their issues.

Article Written by

MSG Team

An insightful writer passionate about sharing expertise, trends, and tips, dedicated to inspiring and informing readers through engaging and thoughtful content.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Conflict of Interest in Investment Banking

MSG Team

The Components of an Investment Bank

MSG Team

Chinese Walls in Investment Banking

MSG Team