This study explores the effect of directors' political contributions on IPOs' valuation and firm survival. We find that individual contributions by directors bring significant benefits to the IPO firms. Specifically, we show that political contributions of board members, particularly those of CEOs and founders, increase the IPO premium and the survivability of IPO firms. We find that the relationship between directors' political contributions and IPO premium is particularly strong among non-venture-backed firms, while the link between directors' political contributions and firm survival is more pronounced for venture-backed firms with strong corporate governance. Our findings are robust to endogeneity concerns and to alternative measures of political donations and IPO performance. Our results confirm the relevance of signaling and resource dependence theories.

Using credit ratings as an uncertainty-reducing mechanism, we provide evidence of the beneficial impact of multiple credit ratings on reducing IPO underpricing and filing price revision. We find that the acquisition of multiple ratings in the pre-IPO period mitigates uncertainty more than the acquisition of a single rating. Multi-rated firms also have higher probabilities of survival than those with a single rating, whereas credit rating levels matter only for IPOs with more than one rating. The IPOs that are awarded the first rating on the borderline between investment and non-investment grades are more likely to seek an additional rating.

Greater partisan alignment among lawmakers enhances their ability to respond rapidly to adverse shocks, but it also undermines the quality of checks and balances and encourages excessive governmental intervention in local areas aligned with the ruling party. We investigate how this form of local policy risk affects IPO underpricing. One standard-deviation increase in political alignment between local politicians and the federal government translates into an extra $1.58 million being left on the table, which corresponds to 5.39% of the average valuation discount. This effect is concentrated in firms that are vulnerable to legislative interventions and has important long-term implications. Our robustness analysis also shows that our baseline results are not sensitive to the inclusion/exclusion of influential states and years with high IPO activity.

This study tests the proposition that higher tournament incentives play a major role in lowering the failure risk of Initial Public Offerings (IPOs). Measuring tournament incentives as the pay gap between the CEO and its subordinate executives, we find that an interquartile change in the distribution of the CEO pay gap translates into a decline in failure risk probability by approximately 27%. The results are driven by the long-term rather than the short-term component of exective pay. Our results hold in an instrumental-variable setting that exploits exogenous variation in the likelihood of employing intra-firm, tournament-based, promotion incentives. Cross-sectional tests indicate that the negative link between tournament incentives and IPO failure is more pronounced when internal promotion contests are more likely to occur. Finally, we document that CEO pay gap is associated with superior long-run operating performance and greater investment efficiency.

The study examines the effect of earnings management by classification shifting on firm success, focusing on the survival of newly listed firms. We argue that shifting income-decreasing expenses from core to special items should negatively associate with future operating performance because of improper signaling of actual repeatable core profitability. We find that classification shifting strongly and negatively affects future Initial Public Offering (IPO) success and survival. We further identify the economic mechanisms that drive this finding and observe that our results are mitigated when the quality of external corporate governance alleviating agency concerns is stronger, also for IPO firms operating within stronger business contexts. Therefore, in an environment that facilitates firm survivability, the existence of weaker than reported sustainable performance may not end up materializing in the form of lower firm survivability as these factors aid firms' continuing operations from a business perspective. Our findings provide evidence of the longer-term implications of a method of earnings management that has long been considered “soft” and without any longer-term reversing consequences.