Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2020, Vol. 480 Issue (6): 133-151    
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
代币发行融资研究——基于企业生存时间的视角
潘越, 谢玉湘, 潘健平
厦门大学经济学院/王亚南经济研究院,福建厦门 361005;东南大学经济管理学院,江苏南京 210096
The Study of Initial Coin Offerings: From the Perspective of Firm Lifespan
PAN Yue, XIE Yuxiang, PAN Jianping
School of Economics/WISE, Xiamen University;School of Economics and Management, Southeast University
下载:  PDF (896KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 本文以中国境内所有的代币发行融资项目为研究对象,研究代币发行融资对初创企业生存时间的影响。研究发现,相比股权融资,代币发行融资会显著缩短初创企业的寿命。这一结论在增加控制变量和使用工具变量等方法后依然稳健。渠道检验的结果显示,代币发行融资阻碍了初创企业人力资本的进一步深化,从而缩短了企业的持续经营时间。从代币发行融资的宏观经济后果来看,代币发行融资所造成的不良影响恶化了地区的信用环境,从而显著提高了地区的融资成本。进一步研究表明,代币发行融资对初创企业的负面影响在信息披露水平较低、不受关注以及缺少媒体监督的样本中更加显著。本文揭示了代币发行融资带来的负面影响,为禁止代币发行融资等规范金融创新的政策提供了经验证据。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
潘越
谢玉湘
潘健平
关键词:  代币发行融资  数字加密货币  生存时间    
Summary:  An initial coin offering (ICO) is a novel way for start-ups to fund projects by issuing blockchain-based tokens via the Internet. ICOs can provide an influx of external capital more quickly than traditional equity financing. By bringing more individual investors into funding start-ups, ICOs also change the funding landscape: previously, the equity financing market was ruled by institutional investors such as venture capital (VC)investors and private equity (PE) investors. ICOs are thus considered a revolution disrupting traditional sources of venture capital.
Theoretically, the tokens issued by ICOs can be regarded as special securities that offer the right to receive income in the absence of voting power. Thus, ICOs may have diametrically opposed effects on firms. On the one hand, an ICO will increase the separation of ownership and control, which gives the actual controllers a tunneling incentive. Moreover, ICO investors cannot provide intensive monitoring services like venture capitalists, so opportunistic behaviors by management are loosely constrained. In addition, the large number of ICO investors scattered around the world are more likely to enjoy benefits as free riders rather than actively providing firms with better access to scarce resources; this would negatively affect the development of start-ups and significantly shorten their lifespan.ICOs also have advantages that help firms to increase their lifespan. First, an ICO is a fast track for raising money, so start-ups can quickly invest in valuable projects and seize market opportunities. Second, ICO investors can use the tokens to purchase start-ups' future products and services; in this way, firms can establish their consumer base at an early stage. Third, because ICO issuers do not suffer from dilution, which reduces their control over the firm, they can engage in more independent, innovative decision making and pursue long-term strategies, instead of engaging in short-sighted behaviors under pressure from investors.
Will ICOs shorten firms' lifespans owing to poor corporate governance, or increase firms' lifespans due to their advantages? To answer this question, we collect data on firms in mainland China that raised capital through ICOs from January 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. We use propensity score matching to match each ICO firm with a VC-backed firm in the same industry and year, ensuring that they have similar ownership structures and sizes.Based on the matched sample, we find that ICOs significantly shorten the lifespans of start-ups compared with equity financing. The results remain robust after adding more control variables and after applying the impacts of the opening of treaty ports as an instrumental variable. Furthermore, the results indicate that ICOs shorten firm lifespan because they hinder firms from deepening their human capital. Regarding the macroeconomic consequences, the adverse impacts caused by ICOs have worsened the regional credit environment, which notably drives the increase in regional financing costs. Further research suggests a more significant negative effect of ICOs on start-ups with poorer information disclosure, less attention from government officials,and less media supervision.
Our study offers important implications in two areas. First, because ICOs as an emerging financing method have significant adverse effects on firm lifespan, managers should weigh the pros and cons when adopting this method. Second, China's ban on ICOs is suited to the current institutional environment. In countries with imperfect legal systems, a disruptive technology will have negative impacts if not properly applied. Thus, it is necessary for the government to regulate financial innovations given the institutional environment.
Our paper makes three contributions to the literature. First, there has been little empirical research on the influence of ICOs on corporate financial behaviors. We collect data on all ICO projects in mainland China and are the first to reveal the adverse effects of this emerging financing method on firm lifespan, which supports the ban on ICOs by the People's Bank of China and provides empirical evidence for the need to regulate financial innovations in China. Second, our paper contributes to the literature on corporate capital structure. Because firms in mainland China follow the “one-share-one-vote” principle, no research has examined the impacts of dual-class shares on Chinese start-ups. Using a novel sample of ICO firms, our paper studies how dual-class shares harm corporate governance mechanisms and the development of firms under imperfect legal systems. Third, our paper extends the literature on the lifespans of start-ups. This study not only addresses the gap in understanding firms' financing methods and lifespans but also gives insights into the factors that influence the long-term development of start-ups.
Keywords:  Initial Coin Offering    Cryptocurrency    Firm Duration
JEL分类号:  G24   G30   D22  
基金资助: * 本文系国家自然科学基金(71972160,71902024,71772155)项目和教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(19YJC630126)资助的阶段性研究成果。感谢中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(20720191085,2242019K40172)的支持。
作者简介:  潘越,管理学博士,教授,厦门大学经济学院金融系,E-mail:panyue@xmu.edu.cn.
谢玉湘,博士研究生,厦门大学王亚南经济研究院,E-mail:xieyuxiang126@126.com.
潘健平(通讯作者),经济学博士,讲师,东南大学经济管理学院,E-mail:panjianping11@126.com.
引用本文:    
潘越, 谢玉湘, 潘健平. 代币发行融资研究——基于企业生存时间的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 480(6): 133-151.
PAN Yue, XIE Yuxiang, PAN Jianping. The Study of Initial Coin Offerings: From the Perspective of Firm Lifespan. Journal of Financial Research, 2020, 480(6): 133-151.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2020/V480/I6/133
[1] 戴亦一、潘越和刘思超,2011,《媒体监督、政府干预与公司治理:来自中国上市公司财务重述视角的证据》,《世界经济》第11期,第121~144页。
[2] 李嘉楠、代谦和庄嘉霖,2019,《开放、市场整合与经济空间变迁:基于近代中国开埠的证据》,《世界经济》第9期,第27~51页。
[3] 梁若冰,2015,《口岸、铁路与中国近代工业化》,《经济研究》第4期,第178~191页。
[4] 史宇鹏、和昂达和陈永伟,2013,《产权保护与企业生存:来自制造业的证据》,《管理世界》第8期,第118~135页。
[5] 谭之博和赵岳,2012,《企业规模与融资来源的实证研究——基于小企业银行融资抑制的视角》,《金融研究》第3期,第166~179页。
[6] 温忠麟、张雷、侯杰泰和刘红云,2004,《中介效应检验程序及其应用》,《心理学报》第36卷第5期,第614~620页。
[7] 谢平和石午光,2015,《数字加密货币研究:一个文献综述》,《金融研究》第1期,第1~15页。
[8] 徐忠和邹传伟,2018,《区块链能做什么、不能做什么?》,《金融研究》第11期,第1~16页。
[9] 许家云和毛其淋,2016,《政府补贴,治理环境与中国企业生存》,《世界经济》第2期,第75~99页。
[10] 杨端六和侯厚培,1931,《六十五年来中国国际贸易统计》,国立中央研究院社会科学研究所。
[11] 于娇、逯宇铎和刘海洋,2015,《出口行为与企业生存概率:一个经验研究》,《世界经济》第4期,第 25~49页。
[12] 袁勇和王飞跃,2016,《区块链技术发展现状与展望》,《自动化学报》第42卷第4期,第481~494页。
[13] Boreiko, D. and N. K. Sahdev 2018. “To ICO or not to ICO-Empirical Analysis of Initial Coin Offerings and Token Sales”, SSRN Working Paper.
[14] Catalini, C. and J. S. Gans 2018. “Initial Coin Offerings and the Value of Crypto Tokens”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
[15] Chod, J. and E. Lyandres 2018. “A Theory of ICOs: Diversification, Agency, and Information Asymmetry”, SSRN Working Paper.
[16] Ewens, M. and M. Marx 2017. “Founder Replacement and Startup Performance”, Review of Financial Studies, 31(4): 1532~1565.
[17] Hellmann, T. and M. Puri 2002. “Venture Capital and the Professionalization of Start-Up Firms: Empirical Evidence”, Journal of Finance, 57(1): 169~197.
[18] Hochberg, Y. V., A. Ljungqvist and Y. Lu 2007. “Whom You Know Matters: Venture Capital Networks and Investment Performance”, Journal of Finance, 62(1): 251~301.
[19] Howell, S. T., M. Niessner and D. Yermack 2018. “Initial Coin Offerings: Financing Growth with Cryptocurrency Token Sales”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
[20] Klepper, S. and K. L. Simons 2000. “The Making of an Oligopoly: Firm Survival and Technological Change in the Evolution of the US Tire Industry”, Journal of Political Economy, 108(4): 728~760.
[21] Masulis, R. W., C. Wang and F. Xie 2009. “Agency Problems at Dual‐Class Companies”, Journal of Finance, 64(4): 1697~1727.
[22] Sørensen, M. 2007. “How Smart Is Smart Money? A Two‐Sided Matching Model of Venture Capital”, Journal of Finance, 62(6): 2725~2762.
[23] Swan, M. 2015. “Blockchain: Blueprint for a New Economy”, O'Reilly Media, Inc.
[24] Zetzsche, D. A., R. P. Buckley, D. W. Arner and L. Föhr 2018. “The ICO Gold Rush: It's a Scam, It's a Bubble, It's a Super Challenge for Regulators”, SSRN Working Paper.
[1] 邵新建, 王兴春, 贾中正, 廖静池. 投资银行-机构投资者关系、“捧场”与IPO中的利益问题[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 473(11): 170-188.
[2] 郭白滢, 周任远. 信息互动、投资决策与股票价格——基于机构投资者信息网络的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 472(10): 188-206.
[3] 何顶, 罗炜. 风险投资声誉和股价“传染”效应——来自中国上市公司立案公告的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 471(9): 169-187.
[4] 常莹莹, 曾泉. 环境信息透明度与企业信用评级——基于债券评级市场的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 467(5): 132-151.
[5] 顾乃康, 赵坤霞. 实时的社会信息与互联网产品众筹的动态性 ——基于大数据的采集与挖掘研究[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 463(1): 168-187.
[6] 王靖一. 现金贷果如洪水猛兽?——来自断点回归设计的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 461(11): 153-171.
[7] 张学勇, 张秋月. 券商声誉损失与公司IPO市场表现——来自中国上市公司IPO造假的新证据[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 460(10): 141-157.
[8] 罗棪心, 麻志明, 王亚平. 券商跟踪海外上市公司对国内分析师盈余预测准确性的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 458(8): 190-206.
[9] 郑建明, 李金甜, 刘琳. 新三板做市交易提高流动性了吗?——基于“流动性悖论”的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 454(4): 190-206.
[10] 庞家任, 周桦, 王玮. 上市公司成立并购基金的影响因素及财富效应研究[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 452(2): 153-171.
[11] 董望, 陈俊, 陈汉文. 内部控制质量影响了分析师行为吗?——来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 450(12): 191-206.
[12] 吴超鹏, 张媛. 风险投资对上市公司股利政策影响的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 447(9): 178-191.
[13] 杜兴强, 谭雪. 国际化董事会、分析师关注与现金股利分配[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 192-206.
[14] 王茵田, 黄张凯, 陈梦. “不平等条约?”:我国对赌协议的风险因素分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 117-128.
[15] 罗炜, 何顶, 洪莉莎, 常国珍. 媒体报道可以预测创业企业的发展前景吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 177-191.
[1] 王曦, 朱立挺, 王凯立. 我国货币政策是否关注资产价格?——基于马尔科夫区制转换BEKK多元GARCH模型[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 1 -17 .
[2] 刘勇政, 李岩. 中国的高速铁路建设与城市经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 18 -33 .
[3] 况伟大, 王琪琳. 房价波动、房贷规模与银行资本充足率[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 34 -48 .
[4] 祝树金, 赵玉龙. 资源错配与企业的出口行为——基于中国工业企业数据的经验研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 49 -64 .
[5] 陈德球, 陈运森, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、市场竞争与资本配置[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 65 -80 .
[6] 牟敦果, 王沛英. 中国能源价格内生性研究及货币政策选择分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 81 -95 .
[7] 高铭, 江嘉骏, 陈佳, 刘玉珍. 谁说女子不如儿郎?——P2P投资行为与过度自信[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 96 -111 .
[8] 吕若思, 刘青, 黄灿, 胡海燕, 卢进勇. 外资在华并购是否改善目标企业经营绩效?——基于企业层面的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 112 -127 .
[9] 姜军, 申丹琳, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 债权人保护与企业创新[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 128 -142 .
[10] 刘莎莎, 孔高文. 信息搜寻、个人投资者交易与股价联动异象——基于股票送转的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 143 -157 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1