A special issue of the Journal of Banking and Finance (2005) devoted to the performance of privatized banks in middle- and low-income countries shows mixed results. In this paper, we present evidence that shows that privatized banks in developed countries have experienced significant improvements in operating performance. The improvement in performance remains significant after controlling for persistence in bank performance. A comparison of the performance of privatized banks in developed and developing countries suggests that privatization has encouraged excessive risk taking among privatized banks in developing countries, with the consequence that those banks carry large non-performing assets than their counterparts in the developed countries. We also observe that consistent with the competitive effects hypothesis, investors view privatization announcements as foreshadowing bad news for rival banks.

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the pre- and post-privatization operating performance and stock market performance of privatized banks and their rivals in middle- and low-income countries. First, we find that privatization announcements elicit negative abnormal returns for rival banks. The effects are more pronounced for subsequent tranche sales where the proportion of government ownership in the privatized bank is reduced. Second, we observe that the privatized banks underperformed the benchmark index in the long run. Investors who bought shares of the privatized banks on the first day of trading and held them for 5years (instead of investing in the market index) lost 24% of their wealth. The underperformance is consistent with the negative long run returns that have been documented for initial public offerings. Third, we document marginal improvements in the post-privatization operating performance of the privatized banks. Though the privatized banks in middle- and low-income countries are better capitalized than rival banks, they carry higher problem loans and are overstaffed relative to other private banks in the post-privatization period. Since most of the sample firms are partially privatized, we submit that perhaps the continued government ownership of the privatized banks might have hindered managers’ ability to restructure the firms.

This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the effects of the privatization of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) on the Bank’s performance and that of the rival banks. First, we find that the major rival banks reacted negatively to the privatization announcements although the initial (partial privatization) and the final (full) privatization announcements elicited stronger stock market reaction from the rival banks. Second, we find that the CBA’s long-term stock market performance improved markedly as the proportion of government ownership decreased, with the Bank’s cumulative abnormal returns being 50% more than those of its rivals three years after the Bank had been fully privatized. Also, the CBA has not only been very efficient in reducing cost and improving its profitability in the post-privatization period, it has outperformed its rivals on almost all the operating performance measures and has become the most profitable bank in Australia. A particularly noteworthy finding is that the improvements in the CBA’s operating and stock market performance and the rival banks’ reaction to the partial and full privatization announcements were strongest after the Bank had been fully privatized. The implication of the results for governments contemplating privatization of state-owned enterprises is that full privatization is necessary in order to achieve strong gains in efficiency, profitability and stock market performance.

This paper examines the effects of the recent spate of financial exchange mutual-to-stock conversion phenomenon on the performance of listed exchanges and the quality of the stock market using the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) as a case study. We find that the ASX stock significantly outperformed the stock index and the control group on a market-adjusted return basis. The stock market performance is driven by strong operating performance. The profitability ratios of the ASX have significantly improved in the five years following the demutualization and self-listing. The performance improvements remain significant even after controlling for growth in the Australian economy. From a market quality perspective, we document evidence of increased trading activity by foreign investors after ASX’s demutualization and self-listing. Interestingly, we also find that bid-ask spreads of the stock market have narrowed in the post-conversion period. In particular, small-cap firms have become more liquid. The results show that stock exchange conversion from mutual to publicly traded exchange is not only value enhancing for the exchange and its shareholders, but it is also beneficial for the stock market as a whole.