SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
1
Das
Comparative Analysis of Listing Performance of Minor IPOs issued
during boom period and recession period
Sajal Das*
Abstract
Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) have always attracted retail investors in the hope of making quick
money on listing. Relatively minor IPOs with small issue sizes seem to be severely underpriced
and so it is essential to study the listing performance of some selected minor IPOs during the
decade 2000 to 2009 comprising of ten years. This research paper examines the minor IPO issues
performance on listing and to test whether listing performance of minor issues are affected by the
boom or recession in the IPO market. Keeping this in mind the paper attempts to study a sample
of twenty minor issues selecting twelve from boom period and eight from recession period
during the decade under study and present a comparative analysis of the listing performance.
Listing performance is computed based on three parameters namely raw return on listing, simple
underpricing and adjusted underpricing. A t-test is carried out between these two independent
samples on these three parameters to assess whether listing performance significantly varies
between boom or recession period. Results derived from sample companies could not establish
any significant difference in listing performance between boom period minor IPOs and recession
period minor IPOs. Moreover severity in underpricing of minor IPOs is also not observed.
Underpricing is found to be moderate and the extent of abnormality in adjusted returns is not so
prominent also.
Keywords: Minor IPO, Under pricing, Listing performance.
* Sajal Das, Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce and Management, West Bengal State University, India, email : [email protected] ,M : +91(0)9038000755.
Introduction
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
2
Das
The Indian Securities market is one of the leading stock markets of the world. The Primary
segment of the Indian securities market which is also referred to as the New Issue market
(NIM) or the Initial Public Offering (IPO) market is the cynosure of all retail investors since
the abolition of Capital Issues (Control) Act, 1947 on May, 1992. IPOs are now being freely
priced and it is altogether left to the judgment of the issuing companies to price their new
securities. Even though in stricter sense, New Issue market and Initial Public Offering
should not be referred interchangeably. One thing needed to be clarified at the very onset
that a new issue not only pertains to the first issue of securities but also next and
subsequent issues too. Rather every time a company desires to raise fresh issue of capital
they have to approach the primary market but in those cases it will be referred as Follow-
on Public Offerings (FPO) and not Initial Public Offerings. Primary market acts as a gateway
for Companies to raise resources for their financial needs. Resource mobilisation through
Primary market is not a recent phenomenon and both listed as well as unlisted companies
use this route to generate funds for themselves. There is no exact specific definition of IPO
as per any statutory act be it the Companies Act, 1956 or the Securities and Exchange
Board of India Act, 1992. But in terms of Regulation 2 (1) (p) of the Securities and Exchange
Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009 an “initial
public offer means an offer of specified securities by an unlisted issuer to the public for
subscription and includes an offer for sale of specified securities to the public by any
existing holders of such securities in an unlisted issuer.” In simple parlance, Initial Public
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
3
Das
Offering refers to the first issue of securities by a company since the beginning of its
formation.
The following table highlights the importance of IPO for the Indian economy. As we can
clearly see from the table below that during the decade under study how Indian Companies
have procured resources for their needs through IPO route.
Table 1: Resources Mobilised from the Primary Market by way of IPOs
Year 2000-
01
2001-
02
2002-
03
2003-
04
2004-
05
2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
No. of
Issues 114 7 6 21 23 79 77 85 21 39
Amt.
(Rs.Cr) 2,722 1,202 1,039 3,434 13,749 10,936 28,504 42,595 2,082 24,696
Source: Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Securities Market, SEBI, 2010
Literature Review:
Shah (1995) conducted one of the early works on Indian IPOs where he identified the
empirical regularities about India’s IPO market for the period January 1991 to April 1995.
He worked with a sample size of 2056 and found that on the average the price at first
listing was 105.6% above the offer price. Madhusoodanan and Thiripalraju (1997) did
extensive analysis on Indian IPOs during 1992-1995. They reported an average initial
underpricing of 75.21%. They tested a number of hypotheses using data of 1922 IPOs.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
4
Das
Madan (2003) studied the under pricing of IPOs and found a very high initial excess return
on IPOs in the Indian primary capital market as compared to other countries. The study
included 1,597 companies during 1989-1995 listed at the BSE. Ghosh (2004) attempted to
depict a detailed investigation in respect of the boom and slump phases in the Indian
primary capital market. His study concentrated on two key variables, namely IPO volume
and initial returns and analyses their nature and interrelation during these two periods.
Several studies had been conducted in the Indian IPO market to assess the short term and
long term performance of IPOs. In this research work the intention is to study the minor
IPOs issued during the last decade and their listing performance with respect to their issue
price.
Objective of the Study:
The primary objective of this research work is to assess the first day listing performance of
selected minor IPOs issued during the study period between 2000 to 2009 comprising ten
years and then to present a comparative analysis of those IPOs which are issued during the
boom period vis-à-vis recession period of the IPO market. To achieve this purpose, the
following objectives are set forth:
1. To compute the first day initial returns defined as raw return on listing (RL);
2. To examine the extent of Simple Underpricing (UPS) on listing day itself;
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
5
Das
3. To test whether first day adjusted listing returns (UPA) significantly differ for minor
issue IPOs during boom and recession season of New –Issue market (NIM).
Research Methodology adopted:
(a) Data and their sources: The raw data used for the entire study during the study
period starting from 01.01.2000 to 31.12.2009 accounting for ten calendar years is
mainly the stock prices of the companies which have gone public through IPO during
this time period. Besides the stock prices of the individual companies, index value for
the relevant stock indices is also used. The entire stock prices and stock indices are
based on data from the data base of National Stock Exchange (NSE) of India Limited
website. NSE is currently the largest stock exchange in India in terms of trading
volumes and by far the most transparent -delivery and settlement mechanism wise. So
the study is completely based on secondary data.
(b) Criteria for selecting samples and sampling technique adopted: Since the study is
based only on the IPO mode of public offerings, we have ignored follow on public
offerings and offer for sale issues during this period. Similarly we have restricted our
sample selection only to those companies which are listed and traded on NSE and have
gone public through Book-building method of IPO only. Moreover for the specific
purpose of our study we need to categorize issue year as Boom (B) season or
Recession (R) season of IPO Market based on the number of issues during that year in
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
6
Das
comparison to the average number of issues for the entire study period. For example,
the calendar year 2005 is considered as Boom period because 41 issues (self-
computed) have accessed the IPO market which is more than the average figure of 32.8
for the entire study period. Similarly with 30 issues during calendar year 2008 is taken
as a recession period which is below the average computed by us.
Table 2: Number of Companies gone public during Study Period (2000-2009)
Calendar
year
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Average
NSE website 11 2 2 5 21 50 73 95 36 21 389 38.9
Self
computation 9* 2 2 5 15** 41@ 61# 85^ 30% 20σ 328 32.8
IPO Season R R R R R B B B R R
Source: Self computation
B indicates Boom period and R indicates Recession period of IPO market.
* indicates 2 companies not listed and traded on NSE,
** indicates 5 are offer for sale and 1 is FPO,
@ indicates 9 issues are FPO,
# indicates 4 companies not listed and traded on NSE and 8 issues are FPO,
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
7
Das
^ indicates 8 companies are not listed and traded on NSE, 1 issue withdrawn and 1
cancelled,
% indicates 3 issues are withdrawn and 3 are not listed and traded on NSE and
σ indicates 1 company not listed and traded on NSE.
Minor issue IPOs are those IPOs whose issue sizes are restricted up to Rs.100 Crores. So
those issues which are beyond this cut-off size of Rs. 100 Crores are not considered for the
purpose of this study as they are not categorized as Minor IPOs. Thereafter we have
adopted purposive sampling technique to select our twenty (20) sample companies for the
study. Purposive sampling being a non-probability sampling is done to solve the research
problem with a specific purpose in mind so as to include only those samples which will
fulfill the purpose of the study. This technique of sample selection is quite similar to
judgment sampling with an only difference being that more emphasis is placed to achieve
the purpose of research study. The entire list of sample companies selected and their issue
details specifying the offer period, issue size, offer price, issue price and date of listing is
given under appendix 1. The final selection of sample and its classification is depicted
below in the following table for having a better glance of the total picture.
Table 3: Sample Classification and Distribution
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
8
Das
Criteria Boom Recession Total
Total Issue
Size
(Rs.Cr.)
Mean Issue
Size
(Rs.Cr.)
Minor
Issues 12 8 20 668.655 33.43276
Source: Self –computation
(c) Models adopted for analysis: Let us discuss the models used to compute various
returns to assess underpricing on the day of listing. For the purpose of measuring the
extent of underpricing we have used the following model:
For Initial Return on Listing Day (Day 1):
We compute three different types of initial return on the day of listing as stated
below:
(i) Raw Return on Listing= ln (Listing Price/Issue Price) * 100
Symbolically, RL = ln (LP/IP) * 100
This is intended to measure the listing gain to the allotees’ who are being
successfully allotted their shares at final price referred to as “issue price”.
Infact listing price is the very first price that is flashed on the ticker of the
stock exchange on the listing date of IPO.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
9
Das
(ii) Simple Underpricing i.e. Unadjusted Return = ln(Closing stock price on
listing day/Issue Price) * 100
Symbolically, UPS = ln (CP1/IP) * 100
This expression measures the return to the IPO allotees’ who are holding
their allotment till the end of the first day trading session.
(iii) Adjusted Underpricing (Initial Returns) on Listing = ln(closing stock price
on day of listing/Issue Price) *100 – ln(Closing Index on listing day/Closing
Index on Offer Closing day) * 100
Symbolically, UPA= [ln (CP1/IP) – ln (CI1/CI0)] * 100
This measures the abnormal return arising to the investors after adjustment
with the return arising from the relevant stock index on that day. Any excess
return over and above the normal benchmark return arising from the
relevant stock index is referred as abnormal return from IPO.
Since the entire data set is obtained from the Historical data base of the website of
NSE it is prudent to use the major indices of the same exchange for obvious purpose.
While computing the adjusted returns of the selected sample companies on the
listing day, it is necessary to compute such excess returns with regard to a
benchmark stock index which will be a good representative of the total sample
under consideration. The Index choice selected for the minor companies is S&P CNX
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
10
Das
500 which is India’s first broad based benchmark of the Indian capital market. This
Index represents about 95.86% of the free float market capitalization of the stocks
listed on NSE and companies included in this Index are disaggregated into 71
industry indices.
(d) Framing of Hypothesis: To perform this research work several hypothesis needed
to be framed and statistical test shall be conducted to give direction to the stated
objectives. Accordingly we have framed the following set of Null Hypothesis which is
stated below:
H10: There is no significant difference in mean raw listing return between Boom
period and Recession period of Minor issue IPOs
H20: There is no significant difference in mean simple underpricing between Boom
period and Recession period of Minor issue IPOs
H30: There is no significant difference in mean adjusted underpricing between
Boom period and Recession period of Minor issue IPOs
(e) Statistical tests used for analysis: Various returns computed from the series of stock
prices belong to interval scale which refers to such a scale where the interval between
successive positions is equal. Being interval scale of data, we would like to perform
parametric test to derive results. For this the very first thing that needs to be done is to
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
11
Das
test the normality of data. There are several ways to tell whether a variable deviates
significantly from normal. We will perform the Kolmorogov-Smirnov (K-S) test using
SPSS statistical software package in support of our justification for adopting traditional
transformation and accordingly substantiate using the statistical parametric test for
our research study. Thereafter F-test, more specifically Levene’s F-test will be carried
out to establish if the two samples have same variance. Depending on the result of F-
test, a t-test is carried out for independent samples to establish differences of mean.
We want to carry out Levene’s F-test as it is not dependent on the assumption of
normality, even though we will be testing the normality of variables. All statistical tests
are to be performed using SPSS statistical software package version 15.0.
Computation of Returns on Listing Day: In this Section we now reproduce the entire
computation of RL, UPS and UPA of all the twenty sample companies segmented over boom
and recession period in tabular form to provide an overall glimpse of the listing day
performance as computed by us according to the methodology already stated.
In the next tables 4 and 5 we take up the computed results of minor issue IPOs during the
boom period and recession period and then present a brief analysis of the computed
results to understand the extent of underpricing and abnormality in returns for the minor
issue companies.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
12
Das
Table 4: Computed Result of Listing Day Performance of Minor IPOs issued during Boom Period
Company
Raw Return on Listing
(RL)
Simple Underpricing
(UPS)
Adjusted Underpricing
(UPA)
BARAK VALLEY 39.91 27.51 28.63
AURIONPRO 12.52 16.88 26.77
RUCHIRA 4.26 (8.86) (5.45)
TFL 7.41 (9.16) (2.67)
OMNITECH 55.96 44.22 48.70
SEL MANUFACTURING 5.41 47.52 58.07
SUPREME INFRA 55.16 48.32 42.43
POCHIRAJU 40.77 50.38 49.27
JHS 49.34 (1.83) (5.85)
LT FOODS 6.90 (5.13) (4.28)
LOKESH MACHINES 41.33 48.51 39.92
AMAR REMEDIES 69.31 69.67 63.66
Source: Self computation (Figures in parentheses indicate negative value.)
The minor issue IPOs during the boom period performed quite well as is evident from the
raw return on listing figures. All twelve issuers could manage a positive return on listing
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
13
Das
for their investors with three companies – Amar Remedies, Omnitech Infosolutions and
Supreme Infra giving return beyond 55 percent and another three companies – JHS
Svendgaard Laboratories, Lokesh Machines and Pochiraju managed to exceed 40 percent
return and another one company Barak Valley Cements touching almost 40 percent. In
fact, Amar remedies was able to generate almost 70 percent raw return on listing for its
shareholders. This is the highest return observed so far in terms of RL. Four companies
Ruchira Papers, Transwarranty Finance Limited, JHS Svendgaard Laboratories and LT
Foods issue price was found to be over priced on listing and all of them failed to generate
any abnormal return for its investors and for the remaining eight companies the issue price
was under priced (UPS) ranging from as high as 69.67 percent for Amar Remedies to as low
as 16.88 percent in case of Aurionpro Solutions. The same eight companies also generated
abnormal return for its investors on the very first day of trading session itself. Remarkably
significant abnormality in listing day returns based on UPA computation is observed in case
of four companies viz. Amar Remedies, SEL Manufacturing, Pochiraju Industries and
Omnitech Infosolutions with Amar Remedies generating an adjusted abnormal return of
63.66 percent over and above the benchmark index return S&P CNX 500.
In the next table we now present the computed listing day returns for the minor issue IPOs
issued during the recession period of eight companies under consideration.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
14
Das
Table 5: Computed Result of Listing Day Performance of Minor IPOs issued during Recession Period
Company
Raw Return on Listing
(RL)
Simple Underpricing
(UPS)
Adjusted Underpricing
(UPA)
EDSERV 0.00 83.07 91.67
20MICRONS 37.47 (49.13) (29.08)
ALKALI (3.96) 52.09 64.42
VARDHAMAN ACRYLIC 18.23 10.44 2.39
BALAJI TELEFILMS 37.90 18.87 16.21
SITASHREE 15.42 37.62 38.61
LOTUSEYE 5.13 (6.38) 1.89
CORDSCABLE 5.76 3.24 6.95
Source: Self computation (Figures in parentheses indicate negative value.)
The raw return on listing is positive for six issuing companies, with one company Alkali
Metals giving a negative return and another one- Edserv Softsystems giving a nil return to
its investors. Balaji Telefilms and 20 Microns are able to generate approximately 37
percent raw return on listing whereas Vardhaman Acrylic and Sitashree Food just manage
to exceed 15 percent for its investors. The most significant observation is the severe
underpricing of Edserv Softsystems which stood at 91.67 percent over and above the
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
15
Das
benchmark index return. Out of the entire sample of twenty companies, this is the only
observed case where we found such severe underpricing based on UPS and UPA
computation of Edserv Softsystems. Six companies issue price was underpriced with
respect to the issue price and only two companies 20 Microns and Lotus Eyecare issue
price was overpriced based on UPS computation.
So overall the minor issue IPOs performs on an average and gave some returns to its
investors on the first day of listing itself. Out of the 20 minor issue IPOs in total only 4
issuing companies could generate abnormal return over and above the 50 percent mark.
Overview of Listing Day performance
In this section we present an overall analysis of the listing day performance of the twenty
sample companies based on the previously computed RL, UPS and UPA values specified in
the preceding section. It is a known fact that IPOs are severly underpriced which has been
already documented both internationally as well as in our Indian context. The following
tables 6 and 7 present the listing performance of our sample companies.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
16
Das
Table 6: Analysis of Listing Performance based on Raw Return on Listing (RL)
ISSUE
TYPE SEASON
NOS. OF COMPANIES WHOSE RAW RETURN ON LISTING (RL) VALUE IS
≤0%
>0% to
25%
>25% to
50%
>50% to
75%
>75% to
100%
>100%
MINOR
(20)
BOOM (12) X 5 4 3 X X
RECESSION
(8)
2 4 2 X X X
TOTAL (20) 2 9 6 3 X X
Source: Self Computation
The raw listing performance of minor IPOs are not so lucrative as we can observe that none
of the issuing company could generate a raw return of higher than 75 percent. Infact only
three issuing companies could generate a return within a range of 50 percent to 75 percent
and all three were issued during the boom period of IPO market. So apparently it seems
boom period is able to give substantial return to its investors. Almost fifty percent of the
issuing companies i.e. nine out of twenty companies under consideration could only give a
return upto 25 percent and another six companies could generate return within a range of
25 to 50 percent. So we can state that seventy five percent of the issuing companies i.e.
fifteen out of twenty sample companies have generated a healthy return of upto 50 percent.
And two companies during recession period failed to give any positive raw return to its
investors at all. In other words, these two companies issue price were not underpriced at
all in comparision with the listed market price on day-1.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
17
Das
Table 7 Listing Performance depicting the extent of Underpricing
ISSUE
TYPE SEASON
NOS. OF COMPANIES WHOSE SIMPLE AND ADJUSTED UNDERPRICING
(UPS AND UPA) VALUE IS
≤0%
>0% to
25%
>25% to
50%
>50% to
75%
>75% to
100%
>100%
UPS UPA UPS UPA UPS UPA UPS UPA UPS UPA UPS UPA
MINOR
(20)
BOOM (12) 4 4 1 X 6 6 1 2 X X X X
RECESSION
(8)
2 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 X X
TOTAL (20) 6 5 4 4 7 7 2 3 1 1 X X
Source: Self computation
On the basis of the observed data in the above table, it can be conclusively stated that none
of the issuing minor IPOs are severely underpriced as not a single company issue price is
underpriced to the extent of 100 percent or more. It is observed that four issuing
companies during boom period of IPO market gave negative adjusted return out of a
sample of twelve companies whereas only one company gave a negative adjusted return
during recession period out of a sample of eight companies under consideration. Fifty
percent of the boom period issuing companies i.e. six out of twelve minor IPOs gave a
healthy return as their adjusted underpricing measured within the range of 25 percent to
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
18
Das
50 percent which is over and above the relevant benchmark index. And fifteen companies
out of the entire sample of twenty i.e. seventy five percent of the sample was able to
generate positive return over and above the benchmark index as we can observe from the
adjusted underpricing computed results.
Testing of Normality of Test Variables:
In this section we carry out the K-S Test using SPSS software package to ascertain whether
the computed values for the twenty samples under study categorized into two groups –
boom period and recession period can be put to parametric test and as such we want to
determine whether the RL, UPS and UPA values follow a normal distribution.
Two-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test Output is given in the following table:
Source: SPSS Output
There are two important results in the above table. The first is the test-statistic
kolmogorov-Smirnov Z value in the second last line of the above table and the second
important is in the bottom line which gives the ‘p’ value listed as asymptotic significance
(2-tailed). Non-parametric K-S method tests the null hypothesis that the data do not differ
Table 8: Test Statistics a
.583 .250 .292
.000 .167 .250 -.583 -.250 -.292 1.278 .548 .639
.076 .925 .809
Absolute Positive
Negative
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
Listing Return Simple
UnderPricing Adjusted
UnderPricing
Grouping Variable: IPO Season a
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
19
Das
from a normal distribution. If P> 0.05 then we can accept the null hypothesis and state that
the data under consideration do not differ significantly from the normal distribution. In the
result output box above, we can see that the P value for all the three test criteria i.e. listing
return, simple underpricing and adjusted underpricing is 0.076, 0.925 and 0.809
respectively which is all greater than 0.05 and as such we can conclude that the dataset
under consideration does not significantly differ from normal distribution and we can now
safely carry on with our parametric tests to perform the hypothesis testing.
Hypothesis Testing:
Keeping in mind the objectives set forth earlier and the three null hypothesis framed H10,
H20 and H30 we now have performed the Levene’s F- test to establish whether the samples
have equal variances. If the variances of the two samples do not differ significantly then we
can comfortably carry out the t-test and safely interpret the results so that logical
conclusions can be drawn.
Table 9: Group Statistics
IPO Season N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Listing Return Boom 12 32.35672 23.58759 6.809152
Recession 8 14.49228 16.05815 5.677413
Simple UnderPricing Boom 12 27.33692 27.89620 8.052942
Recession 8 18.72626 39.91779 14.11307
Adjusted UnderPricing
Boom 12 28.26531 26.38059 7.615422
Recession 8 24.13262 38.82447 13.72652
Source: SPSS Output
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
20
Das
Table 10: Independent Samples Test
Source: SPSS Output
For the two sample under consideration, the results of F-test indicate that on the basis of
three criteria of Listing return, Simple Underpricing and Adjusted Underpricing, the P-
value is greater than 0.05 and as such the variances of the two independent sample are not
significantly unequal. In other words, we can now interpret the t-test results safely.
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Differen
ce
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower
Listing Return Equal variances assumed
4.101 .058 1.865 18 .079 17.8644 9.57739 -
2.2569 37.985
Equal variances not assumed
2.015 17.966 .059 17.8644 8.86552 -
.76386 36.492
Simple Under Pricing
Equal variances assumed
.374 .549 .570 18 .576 8.61066 15.1054 -
23.124 40.345
Equal variances not assumed
.530 11.523 .606 8.61066 16.2489 -
26.956 44.177
Adjusted Under Pricing
Equal variances assumed
1.270 .275 .285 18 .779 4.13269 14.5163 -
26.365 34.630
Equal variances not assumed
.263 11.292 .797 4.13269 15.6975 -
30.308 38.574
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
21
Das
Interpretation of Results of Hypothesis Testing:
For H10: The P-value stood at 0.079 i.e. P>0.05, so we do not reject the null hypothesis and
state that there is no significant difference in mean listing return of Minor IPOs issued
during Boom or Recession period.
For H20: The P-value stood at 0.576 i.e. P>0.05, so again we do not reject the null
hypothesis and state that there is no significant difference in mean simple underpricing
between Boom period and Recession period Minor IPOs.
For H30: Here the P-value stood at 0.779 i.e. P>0.05 , so we do not reject the null
hypothesis and state that there is no significant difference in mean adjusted underpricing
of Minor IPOs issued during Boom or Recession period.
Conclusion:
From the research work carried out with the twenty IPO issuing companies of minor sizes
we cannot conclude that boom period IPOs are more underpriced in comparison to
recession period. There was an apprehension that seasonality of the IPO market at the time
of issue is an important determinant in assessing whether IPOs are underpriced or not. But
from this study carried out the same cannot be concluded. Even the adjusted underpricing
results show no significant impact due to Boom or Recession period of IPO market. So again
we cannot conclude that issuers of minor IPOs is able to generate higher return on listing
day for its investors during boom period rather than recession period. It can be finally
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
22
Das
stated that minor IPOs as a whole are not severely underpriced as not a single issuing
company is found to be underpriced to the extent of 100 percent and above in comparison
to the research findings of the previous decade of this study.
References:
Aggarwal, Deepak (2006), IPO Pricing – Book Building and Efficient Pricing
Methodology, www.ssrn.com/abstract=1311749.
Banerjee, Arindam (2006), Indian Capital Markets- Trends & Reforms, (ed.), The
ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad.
Baral S. and Obaidullah Mohmmed (1998), Short-run Price Behaviour of IPOs in
India, Some Empirical Findings, UTI Institute of Capital Markets.
Barel, Sushant Kumar (2000), An Empirical Investigation into Pricing of Initial Public
Offerings in India (1999-2000), Ph.D. Unpublished Thesis, Berhampur University,
Orissa.
Basu, Indrajit (2005), Boom Time for India’s Primary Share Market, Asia Time Online,
www.atime.com
Ghosh, Sourabh (2004), Boom and Slump Periods in the India IPO Market, RBI
Occasional Papers, Vol. 25, No.1, 2 and 3, Summer, Monsoon and Winter.
Krishnamurti C. and Pradeep Kumar (2002), The Initial Listing Performance of
Indian IPOs, Managerial Finance, Vol.28, pp. 39-51.
Madan, Arwah Arjun (2003), Investments in IPOs in the Indian Capital Market,
Bimaquest, Vol.III, Issue 1, January, 2003.
Madan, Arwah Arjun (2003), Behaviour of IPOs in the Pre and Post Liberalisation Era
in the Indian Capital Market, Indian Capital Market – An Empirical Study (ed.),
Anmol Publication, New Delhi.
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
23
Das
Madhusoodan, T.P. and Thiripalraju M. (1997), Underpricing in IPOs: The Indian
Evidence, Vikalpa, Vol.22, pp. 17-30.
Narasimhah, M.S. and Ramana, L.V. (1995), Pricing of Initial Public Offerings: Indian
Experience with Equity Issues, The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, Vol.1, pp. 26-39.
Shah Ajay (1995), The Indian IPO Market: Empirical Facts, www.cmie.ernet.in.
Indian Securities Market: A Review, National Stock Exchange of India Limited, Vol.
XI., 2008, www.nseindia.com
Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Securities Market, SEBI, 2009, www.sebi.gov.in
Appenix 1: Issue Details of Sample companies
Companies Issue Size
(Rs. Cr)
Offer Period Offer price
(Rs.)
Issue Price
(Rs.)
Date of
Listing
Barak Valley
Cements Ltd.
23.772 29 Oct-1 Nov
2007 37-42 42 23 Nov 2007
Edserv Softsystems
Ltd.
23.8434 5 -9 Feb 2009 55-60 60 2 Mar 2009
20 Microns Ltd.
23.9285 8-11 Sep 2008 50-55 55 6 Oct 2008
Alkali Metals Ltd.
26.265 7-15 Oct 2008 86-103 103 6 Nov 2008
Aurionpro Solutions
Ltd.
27 27 Sep-4 Oct
2005 81-90 90 25 Oct 2005
Vardhman Acrylics
Ltd.
27.1331 15-19 Sep 2003 10 10 30 Sep 2003
Ruchira Papers Ltd.
28.5 23-29 Nov 2006 21-23 23 20 Dec 2006
SIT Journal of Management
Vol. 1. No. 1. June 2012. Pp. 82 - 105
24
Das
Transwarranty Finance Ltd.
31.2 23 Jan- 2 Feb
2007 48-55 52 26 Feb 2007
Balaji Telefilms Ltd.
32.76 6-12 Oct 2000 130 130 22 Nov 2000
Sita Shree Food Products Ltd.
35
11-14 Mar 2008
27-30
30
7 April 2008
Omnitech
Infosolutions Ltd.
35 19-25 July 2007 90-105 105 14 Aug 2007
SEL Manufacturing
Co. Ltd.
37.2457 26-31 July 2007 80-90 90 21 Aug 2007
Supreme
Infrastructure India
Ltd
37.53 21-26 Sep 2007 95-108 108 18 Oct 2007
Pochiraju Industries
Ltd.
37.57 15-18 Jan 2007 25-30 30 9 Feb 2007
Lotus Eyecare
Hospital Ltd.
38 12-20 Jun 2008 36-38 38 11 July 2008
JHS Svendgaard
Laboratories Ltd.
38.86 26 Sep- 4 Oct
2006 49-58 58 21 Oct 2006
LT Foods Ltd.
39.4 27-30 Nov 2006 50-56 56 18 Dec 2006
Cords Cable
Industries Ltd.
41.6475 21-24 Jan 2008 125-135 135 13 Feb 2008
Lokesh Machines
Ltd.
42 7-13 April 2006 130-140 140 5 May 2006
Amar Remedies Ltd.
42 25-31 Aug 2005 24-28 28 16 Sep 2005