Skip to main content
Log in

An empirical investigation of going private decisions of U.S. firms

  • Published:
Journal of Economics and Finance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to many managers, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 caused the costs of being public to increase. Subsequently, following the Act, many firms went private rather than incur the costs. We investigate the differences in the financial characteristics of firms that went private between 1998 and 2003 and a control sample of firms which went public and did not go private Our results indicate that there are differences in the two groups, as well as differences in firms that went private prior to and following Sarbanes-Oxley. Taken together, our results are indicative of going private to avoid the higher costs of being public post Sarbanes-Oxley.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altman, E. 1968. “Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis and the Prediction of Corporate Bankruptcy.”Journal of Finance, 23: 589–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, S. 2004. “The Latest Movement to Going Private: An Empirical Study.”Journal of Applied Finance 14: 36–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brau, J., and S. Fawcett. 2006. “Initial Public Offerings: An Analysis of Theory and Practice.”Journal of Finance 69: 399–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, W. 2006. “The Costs of Being Public After Sarbanes-Oxley: The Irony of ‘Going Private’.”Emory Law Journal 55: 441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, D. and P. Schindler. 2001.Business Research Methods. Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeAngelo, H., L. DeAngelo, and E. Rice. 1984. “Going Private: Minority Freezeouts and Stockholder Wealth.”Journal of Law and Economics 27: 367–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmister, R. 1982. “An Empirical Test of Financial Ratio Analysis for Small Business Failure Prediction.”Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 7: 1477–1492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel, E, R. Hayes and X. Wang. 2004. “The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and Firms Going-Private Decisions.” Working paper University of Chicago.

  • Evans, D. 1987. “Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth.”Journal of Political Economy 95: 657–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, P. 2005. “Cable Systems’ New Weapon in Phone Battle: Going Private.”Wall Street Journal June21: B1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, P., R. Kieschnick, and W. Rotenberg. 1999. “On the Heterogeneity of Leveraged Going Private Transactions.”Review of Financial Studies 12: 281–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., R. Anderson, R. Tatham, and W. Black. 1992.Multivariate Data Analysis, New York: Macmillian Publishing Firm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, P. 2004. “Going Private—A Response to an Increased Regulatory Burden?” Working paper UCLA School of Law.

  • Jensen, M. 1986. “Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance and Takeovers.”American Economic Review 76: 323–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehn, K. and A. Pulsen. 1989. “Free Cash Flow and Stockholder Gains in Going Private Transactions.”Journal of Finance 44: 771–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbould, G., R. Chatfield, and R. Anderson. 1992. “Leveraged Buyouts and Tax Incentives.”Financial Management 21: 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. 1993. “A Multiple Discriminant Investigation into the Financial Characteristics of High Growth Firms.”Advances in Quantitative Analysis of Finance and Accounting 2: 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, S., M. Waters, and B. Payne. 1995. “Going Private: A Financial Profile.”Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions 8: 53–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, L., K. Gleason, and J. Madura. 2005. “Did Sarbanes-Oxle Make Being Public Prohibitive? Evidence From Going Private Transactions.” Working paper Bentley College.

  • Scholes, M., and M. Wolfson. 1990. “The Effects of Changes in Tax Laws on Corporate Reorganization Activity.”Journal of Business 63: 141–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sisk, M. 2005. “Going Private”.US Banker June: 42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovin, M., M. Sushka and Y. Bendeck. 1991. “The Intra-Industry Effects of Going Private Transactions.”Journal of Finance 46: 1537–1550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M. and R. Walking. 1993. “The Impact of Managerial Ownership on Acquisition Attempts and Target Shareholder Wealth.”Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 28: 439–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talley, K. 2003. “More Firms Go Private.”Wall Street Journal September 22: 68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treschmann, J. and G. Pinche. 1973. “A Multivariate Model for Predicting Financially Distressed Property-Liability Insurers.”Journal of Risk and Insurance 40: 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. 1975. “A Multivariate Analysis for Common Stock Quality Ratings.” Paper presented to the 1975 meeting of the Financial Management Association, Kansas City: October, 1975.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gleason, K., Payne, B. & Wiggenhorn, J. An empirical investigation of going private decisions of U.S. firms. J Econ Finan 31, 207–218 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02751643

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02751643

Keywords

Navigation