Abstract
While categorical ambiguity impacts negatively firm value in some research, others estimate that congruence with evaluators’ theory of value matters more than prima facie categorical ambiguity. This paper addresses these theoretical and empirical puzzles in a novel fashion, using linguistic patterns of 2930 firms going public and all institutional investors in the US from 1996 to 2015. In isolation, we find as expected that (1) as the linguistic information contained in IPO prospectus is categorically ambiguous, the IPO’s stock return on the first day of trading (underpricing) is lower; and (2) the linguistic congruence of an IPO across institutional investors (average consensus across theories of value and variation in consensus) increases underpricing. When combined, the direct effect of categorical ambiguity dissipates, suggesting the prevalence of the theory of value arguments over categorization based on prototypes. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for research on market categories, firm valuation, and language using big data.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
