Exit and voice after mass privatization: The case of Russia

Frydman, Roman; Pistor, Katharina; Rapaczyński, Andrzej

doi:10.1016/0014-2921(95)00071-2

Cited by 57 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Data presented and discussed in Haggarty and Shirley (1996), Schmitz (1996), and Bortolotti, Fantini, Siniscalco, and Vitalini (1998)--as well as our own empirical work on share issue privatization--suggests that the SOE share of industrialized-country GDP has continued to decline since 1988, and has now probably fallen below five percent. Furthermore, the mass privatization programs in the transition economies of central and eastern Europe, mentioned above, have dramatically reduced the level of state ownership of 7 Frydman, Pistor, and Rapaczynski (1996), Blanchard and Aghion (1996), Pistor and Spicer (1997), 9 and Meyendorff and Snyder (1997) all document that the state retains significant--often decisive--influence in "privatized" firms in the transition economies, either as a large shareholder or as a lender/subsidizer of last resort, or both.…”

Section: Economic Impact Of Privatizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the actual experience of most countries with vouchers must be judged as quite poor, none has been quite as dismal as Russia's. While a variety of factors have played a role, Frydman, Pistor, and Rapaczynski (1996) show that insider control of privatized firms has been by far the most important impediment to effective reform. The Russian government initially had high hopes that the "voucher privatization funds" (VPFs) which formed during the initial voucher distributions might be able to overcome the collective action problem inherent in mass privatization programs and use their concentrated ownership in privatized firms to force managers to restructure.…”

Section: Voucher Privatizations In Transition Economiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The flaws in Russia's privatization program are analyzed in Boycko, Shleifer, and Vishny (1994) 15 and Frydman, Pistor, and Rapaczynski (1996). As of September 1998, the Russian government had defaulted on its domestic and international debt and the country was in an economic free fall, with the ruble depreciating from 6.2 per dollar to over 20 in less than one month, and with the RTS stock market index falling almost 90 percent from its level eleven months earlier.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization

Megginson

Netter²

2001

Journal of Economic Literature

2,516

538

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. This paper was developed with financial support from the SBF Bourse de Paris and the New York Stock Exchange, and the assistance and comments of George Sofianos, Bill Tschirhart, Jean-Claude Cosset, Kathy Dewenter, Ranko Jelic, John Nellis, Rob Nash, Marc Lipson, Harold Mulherin, and Annette Poulsen is gratefully acknowledged. Earlier drafts of the authors' privatization works cited herein have benefited from comments received from participants at the 1993 National Bureau of Economic Research corporate finance conference, the 1994-1998 American Finance Association annual meetings, the 1994 American Economic Association meeting, the 1994 Political Economy Research Center Privatization Forum, the 1995-1998 Financial Management Association annual meetings, the 1995 European Finance Association meeting, the 1997 NYSE Cancun Conference on Global Equity Issuance, and seminars at the Copenhagen Business School, the Norwegian School of Management, the University of Chile, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Emory University, the University of Georgia, Florida State University, Virginia Tech, Indiana University, The University of Houston, and Tulane University. All remaining errors are the authors' alone. This study surveys the academic and professional literature examining the privatization of stateowned enterprises (SOEs), with a focus on empirical studies. The paper is written from the perspective of a policy-maker weighing the adoption of a national privatization program, who seeks answers to the following questions: (1) How large an impact have privatization programs actually had thus far on state involvement in different national economies?; (2) Has the decision to privatize been based on dissatisfaction with the economic performance of SOEs, and is there a viable policy alternative to divestment?; (3) Have privatization programs significantly improved the operating and financial performance of the companies divested?; (4) Terms of use: Documents in EconStor mayOnce the decision to privatize is made, how do governments select the appropriate method and sequencing of selling state-owned assets?; (5) How do governments price the SOEs they wish to sell and how do they decide which potential buyers to favor?; and (6) Have investors who purchase the shares of privatized firms experienced positive short and long-term returns?Privatization has been instrumental in reducing state ownership in many countries and had a transforming effect on global stock markets, al...

show abstract

Section: Economic Impact Of Privatizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Voucher Privatizations In Transition Economiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization

Megginson

Netter²

2001

Journal of Economic Literature

2,516

538

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…' Lipton et al (1990) and Boycko et al (1994) have analysed mass privatization programs. Serious empirical studies that we are aware of are Pohl et al (1997) on Eastern Europe, Frydman et al (1996), and Barberis et al (1996) on Russia, Hingorani et al (1997) on Czechoslovakia, and Dyck (1997) on East Germany. Biais and Perotti (2002) have an interesting model on politically motivated privatization that is helpful to understand the privatization programs in Eastern Europe.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

China share issue privatization: the extent of its success

Sun

Tong

2003

Journal of Financial Economics

850

548

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluate the performance changes of 634 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) listed on China's two exchanges upon share issuing privatisation (SIP) in the period 1994-1998. We find that SIP is effective in improving SOEs' earnings ability, real sales, and workers' productivity but is not successful in improving profit returns and leverage after privatisation. We also find state ownership having negative impacts on firm performance and legal-person ownership having positive impacts on firm performance after SIP, which suggests that legal persons behave differently from the state government. Surprisingly, foreign ownership does not show uniformly strong, positive impacts on firm performance. r

show abstract

“…Tested interrelations a Empirical method b Barberis et al (1996) 1992-1993 II RA (OLS, 2SLS) * Frydman, Pistor, and Rapaczynski (1996) 1994 I RA (LOG) Klepach, Kuznetsov, and Kryuchkova (1996) 1995 II DS Linz (1996) 1992-1995 I RA (PRO) Filatotchev, Wright, and Bleaney (1999) 1992-1996I DS Filatotchev, Wright, Buck, and Dyomina (1999 …”

Section: Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Corporate Governance and Performance on Managerial Turnover

Abe

Iwasaki

2009

Organization and Development of Russian Business

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. -In this paper, we deliberate the possible impacts of corporate governance and performance on managerial turnover using a unique dataset of Russian corporations. This study is different from most previous works in that we deal with not only CEO dismissals, but also with managerial turnover in a company as a whole. We find that nonpayment of dividends is correlated significantly with managerial turnover. We also find that the presence of dominant shareholders and foreign investors is another important factor in causing managerial dismissal in Russian corporations, but these two kinds of company owners reveal different effects in terms of turnover magnitude.

show abstract

Exit and voice after mass privatization: The case of Russia

Cited by 57 publications

References 1 publication

From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization

From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization

China share issue privatization: the extent of its success

Impact of Corporate Governance and Performance on Managerial Turnover

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About