| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 知識管理組 === 92 === Subject to the different governing laws and regulations of firms’ outstanding stocks between U.S.A and Taiwan, this study addresses several themes by considering particularly the role and effect of Subsidiaries’ Trading of Parents’ Stocks (STPS). Subgroups of OMR firms as of OMR I, OMR+STPS, OMR II, and pure STPS group in different phases (phase I: Aug. 2000 – Nov. 2001; phase II: Dec. 2001 – Sept. 2003) are formed to compare and examine various hypotheses in this study. Empirical results show that 1). with or without STPS, all OMRs can bring positive abnormal return (AR) after announcements of the firms. 2). the AR of OMR+STPS is larger than that of OMR I in phase I before STPS was prohibited (Nov. 12, 2001). 3). the AR of OMR II in phase II is found to be smaller than those of OMR I and OMR+STPS in phase I. 4). the motive of OMR groups in phase I in this study is found to be consistent with hypothesis of undervaluation, but OMR II is not found so, which illustrates that there indeed exists some inherent discrepancies between OMRs in phase I and phase II given the only difference is STPS in between. 5). the ROE (return on equity) in previous quarter prior to OMR announcements is found negatively correlated with CAR (cumulative abnormal return) in regression only for OMR+STPS, while the ROEs of other OMR I and OMR II without STPS are found positively correlated with CARs, which again illustrates the deep influence of STPS to the stock prices in terms of OMRs. 6). positive CAR trend of pure STPS group in phase I after purchase announcements is not found, which is consistent with the hypothesis of stock price maintenance.
|
|---|
