We find that the underperformance of IPO stocks relative to the market over a three-year holding period is less severe for IPOs handled by more prestigious underwriters. Consistent with prior studies, we also find that IPOs managed by more reputable underwriters are associated with less short-run underpricing. Among the various existing proxies for underwriter reputation, the Carter-Manaster measure is the most significant in the context of initial returns and also in the context of the three-year performance of IPOs. The study also provides an updated list of the Carter-Manaster measure for various underwriters.A SUBSTANTIAL BODY of work within the initial public offering (IPO) of common stock literature examines the effects of underwriter reputation on the initial performance of IPOs (see, among others, Logue (1973), Beatty and Ritter (1986), Titman and Trueman (1986), and Maksimovic and Unal (1993)). The financial press provides some evidence of the correlation between IPO performance and underwriter reputation (see Forbes June 20, 1994). However, no prior academic work has documented the relation between the long-run performance of IPOs and different proxies for underwriter prestige. This study has two primary objectives. First, it examines the initial returns and the three-year returns following the IPOs and the relationship of those returns with underwriter reputation. Second, the study provides a comparative evaluation of three existing measures of underwriter prestige in the context of initial returns and also in the context of the three-year performance of IPOs.Several proxies for underwriter reputation have been developed in the IPO literature. Logue (1973) and Beatty and Ritter (1986) are among the first to develop a measure of underwriter reputation. Carter and Manaster (1990) use underwriters' relative placements in stock offering "tombstone" announcements. The Carter-Manaster (CM) system is not unlike the starring order appearing in Hollywood's billboards. The compilation of the CM measure is a fairly tedious process because each tombstone has the potential to impact the ordering of each underwriter's relative position in the data bank. On the other hand, the Johnson and Miller (1988) and Megginson and Weiss (1991) measures require less effort to construct. Johnson and Miller (JM) use a modified form of the Carter and Manaster method. JM classify

No abstract

In this paper we present the results of a regional survey of small business entrepreneurs that asked about the use of and motivation for bootstrap financing -employing resources other than traditional financing to fund operations. Extending the work of Winborg and Landstrom (2000) our results indicate that perceived risk is highly associated with owners' assessment of the importance of bootstrap financing techniques. We also find that owners who see themselves as having limited ability are more likely to use private owner financing techniques that tend to squeeze all available funds from the owner and those close to him/her. Alternatively, bootstrap financing techniques involving the delay of payments are preferred when risk levels appear highest, while owners in business environments with the most opportunity are more likely to try to minimize accounts receivable. The results of this research can be used by consultants and agencies that assist small firms by acquainting owners with the myriad techniques for funding their companies as well as understanding the factors that often motivate the use of particular techniques. Owners should recognize that they should explore various funding alternatives rather than simply using what they are familiar with or what is readily available.

No abstract

Endogenous pregnane steroids, such as allopregnanolone (3alpha-hydroxy-5alpha-pregnan-20-one; 3alpha, 5alpha-P) and pregnanolone (3alpha-hydroxy-5beta-pregnan-20-one; 3alpha,5beta-P), allosterically modulate GABA(A) receptor function and exhibit behavioral effects similar to benzodiazepines, though acting at a distinct recognition site. Inasmuch as some positive allosteric modulators of GABA(A) receptor function exhibit profound interactions with ethanol, the effects of 3alpha,5alpha-P and 3alpha,5beta-P were compared to those of two benzodiazepines, triazolam and diazepam, on the motor function of mice and rats when administered either alone or in combination with ethanol. All four test compounds exhibited dose-related impairment of motor function in the horizontal wire task in mice and the rotorod task in rats. Ethanol caused a marked enhancement of triazolamand diazepam-induced motor impairment. In contrast, ethanol enhanced to a lesser extent the motor impairment induced by both neurosteroids in mice and not at all in rats. All four compounds increased ethanol-induced behavioral sleep time in mice, although the benzodiazepines did so at a much smaller fraction of their ataxic doses as compared to the neurosteroids. As one of the undesired side-effects of therapeutic use of benzodiazepines is their interaction with ethanol, development of neuroactive steroids as drugs may offer therapeutic advantages.