Abstract
The main objective of this study is to examine the nonlinear relationship between ownership concentration and firm value. The issue of dynamic endogeneity between the two variables is investigated in this study. Empirically, there is no evidence of nonlinearity between ownership concentration and firm value. The result also suggests that dynamic endogeneity is not serious in influencing the relationship between ownership concentration and value of Malaysian firms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Setia-Atmaja LY (2009) Governance mechanisms and firm value: the impact of ownership concentration and dividends. Corp Gov Int Rev 17(6):694–709
Liu C, Uchida K, Yang Y (2012) Corporate governance and firm value during the global financial crisis: evidence from China. Int Rev Financ Anal 21:70–80
Manawaduge AS, De Zoysa A, Rudkin KM (2009) Performance implication of ownership structure and ownership concentration: evidence from Sri Lankan firms. In: Performance management association conference. Performance Measurement Association, Dunedin, New Zealand
Gurunlu M (2009) The effects of corporate governance mechanisms on post-IPO performance: empirical evidence from an emerging market, Working paper. Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE), Istanbul
Hamid AA (2011) Network governance in government-linked companies (GLCs) and non-government-linked companies (NGLCs) in Malaysia. J Financ Rep Account 9(1):54–73
Rapaport M, Sheng HH (2010) Ownership structure and firm value in Brazil. Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion 45:76–95
Amzaleg Y, Barak R (2013) Ownership concentration and the value effect of Related Party Transactions (RPTs). J Modern Account Audit 9(2):239–255
Foroughi M, Fooladi M (2012) Concentration of ownership in Iranian listed firms. Int J Soc Sci Hum 2(2):112–116
Saleem F, Yasir M, Shehzad F, Ahmed K, Sehrish S (2012) Budget deficit and stock prices: evidence from Pakistan and India. Int J Contemp Res Bus 4(5):181
Choi SB, Park BI, Hong P (2012) Does ownership structure matter for firm technological innovation performance? The case of Korean firms. Corp Gov Int Rev 20(3):267–288
GarcÃa-Meca E, Sánchez-Ballesta JP (2011) Firm value and ownership structure in the Spanish capital market. Corp Gov 11(1):41–53
Ma S, Naughton T, Tian G (2010) Ownership and ownership concentration: which is important in determining the performance of China’s listed firms? Account Financ 50(4):871–897
Balsmeier B, Czarnitzki D (2009) Ownership concentration, institutional development and firm performance in Central and Eastern Europe. Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven
Lee S-P, Chuang, T-H (2008),The determinants of corporate performance: a viewpoint from insider ownership and institutional ownership. www.emeraldinsight.com/0268-6902.htm
Abdullah F, Shah A, Khan S (2012) Firm performance and the nature of agency problems in insiders-controlled firms: evidence from Pakistan. 28th annual general meeting and conference of Pakistan Society of Development Economists, Islamabad
Haiyan J, Habib A, Smallman C (2009) The effect of ownership concentration on CEO compensation-firm performance relationship in New Zealand. Pac Account Rev 21(2):104–131
Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 3(4):305–360
Shleifer A, Vishny RW,“(1986) Large shareholders and corporate control. J Polit Econ 94(3), Part 1:461–488
Jensen MC (1986) Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. Am Econ Rev 76(2):323–329
Hu Y, Izumida S (2008) Ownership concentration and corporate performance: a causal analysis with Japanese panel data. Corp Gov Int Rev 16(4):342–358
Himmelberg CP, Hubbard GR, Palia D (1999) Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. J Financ Econ 53(3):353–384
Ritter JR (1991) The long-run performance of initial public offerings. J Financ 46(1):3–27
Thomsen S, Pedersen T, Kvist HK (2006) Blockholder ownership: effects on firm value in market and control based governance systems. J Corp Financ 12(2):246–269
Wintoki MB, Linck JS, Netter JM, (2012) Endogeneity and the dynamics of internal corporate governance. http://ssrn.com/abstract=970986. Accessed 31 Dec 2012
Hansen LP (1982) Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica 50(4):1029–1054
Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58(2):277–297
Acknowledgment
This research is funded by ERGS, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), under contract number 600-RMI/ERGS 5/3 (62/2012).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hassan, H., Hassan, S., Abdul Karim, N., Salamuddin, N. (2016). Nonlinearity Between Ownership Concentration and Firm Value. In: Pyeman, J., Wan Rashid, W., Hanif, A., Syed Mohamad, S., Tan, P. (eds) Proceedings of the 1st AAGBS International Conference on Business Management 2014 (AiCoBM 2014). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-426-9_46
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-426-9_46
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-425-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-426-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)