Yupana Wiwattanakantang

An empirical study on the determinants of the capital structure of Thai firms

This study presents empirical evidence on the determinants of the capital structure of non-financial firms in 1996. Empirical results imply that the tax effect, the signaling effect and the agency costs play a role in financing decisions. Ownership structure also effects financial policy. Single-family owned firms have significantly higher debt level. Only in single-family owned firms does managerial shareholdings have consistently positive influence on firm leverage. Finally large shareholders affect the debt ratio negatively, implying that they may monitor the management.

Big Business Owners in Politics

This paper investigates a little studied but common mechanism that firms use to obtain state favors: business owners themselves seeking election to top office. Using Thailand as a research setting, we find that the more business owners rely on government concessions or the wealthier they are, the more likely they are to run for top office. Once in power, the market valuation of their firms increases dramatically. Surprisingly, the political power does not influence the financing strategies of their firms. Instead, business owners in top offices use their policy-decision powers to implement regulations and public policies favorable to their firms. Such policies hinder not only domestic competitors but also foreign investors. As a result, these politically connected firms are able to capture more market share. The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org., Oxford University Press.

Must Love Kill the Family Firm? Some Exploratory Evidence

Family firms depend on a succession of capable heirs to stay afloat. If talent and IQ are inherited, this problem is mitigated. If, however, progeny talent and IQ display mean reversion (or worse), family firms are eventually doomed. Since family firms persist, solutions to this succession problem must exist. We submit that marriage can transfuse outside talent and reinvigorate family firms. This implies that changes to the institution of marriage—notably, a decline in arranged marriages in favor of marriages for “love”—bode ill for the survival of family firms. Consistent with this, the predominance of family firms correlates strongly across countries with plausible proxies for arranged marriage norms.

The Value of Marriage to Family Firms

This paper presents the first empirical evidence showing that the marriage of a member of the controlling family adds value to public corporations. The results, based on a uniquely comprehensive data set from Thailand, show that the family firm’s stock price increases when the partner is from either a prominent business or a political family. Abnormal returns tend to be higher for firms whose operation depends on extensive networks. In contrast, marriages to ordinary citizens are not associated with any abnormal returns. These findings are generally supportive of the value of networks in general and marriage in particular.

Did Families Lose or Gain Control? Thai Firms after the East Asian Financial Crisis

This paper investigates the ownership and control of Thai public firms in the period after the East Asian financial crisis, compared to those in the pre-crisis period. Using the comprehensive unique database of ownership and board structures, we find that the ownership and control appear to be more concentrated in the hands of controlling shareholders subsequent to the crisis. Interestingly, even though families remain the most prevalent owners of Thai firms and are still actively involved in the management after the financial crisis, their role as the controlling shareholder becomes less significant. In addition, our results show that direct shareholdings are most frequently used as a means of control in both periods. Pyramids and cross-shareholdings, however, are employed to the lesser extent following the crisis.

Why do Shareholders Value Marriage

This paper shows that marriage can function in a similar way as mergers and acquisitions. To set up alliances that would benefit the firms, a controlling family would encourage their children to marry a person from a politically or economically powerful family. To test this hypothesis, we collect wedding announcements for the offspring of big-business owners in Thailand. The results from the event study show positive abnormal returns when the partner is from a well-connected family. The probit analysis shows that offspring are more likely to choose their partner from a well-connected family when the familys businesses are in the property and construction industries, based on state contracts, more diversified and heavily in debt. Overall, the results suggest that family networks might provide reputation capital, reliable information, and enforce contracts, thus reducing market frictions faced by entrepreneurs in weak institutional environments.

Family Business Groups and Organizational Structure: A Study of Bank Pyramidal Ownership in Thailand

This paper investigates how banks and finance companies operate in a family business group. Using uniquely detailed ownership data from Thailand, we find that the controlling families extensively use pyramids to control banks and finance companies and assign different lending strategies across pyramidal tiers. Lower-tier banks tend to extend loans more aggressively and perform more poorly, while upper tier banks carry out more profitable investments. After the crisis hit, upper-tier banks survived and almost all lower-tier banks went bankrupt. Our results suggest that the multilayer organizational structure of bank ownership can affect a bank´s lending behavior and its resistance to economic shocks.