Vol. 2 No. 2 (2016)
September 2016: Entrepreneurship: Antecedents and Effects

Articles

Relations between country R&D expenses and startup IPO in Europe: Empirical research of startup IPO activities from 2005 to 2014

Published 2016-10-19

  • Sassan Rismani
    • ,
  • Dimas Widiantoro

Sassan Rismani
Cracow University of Economics

Dimas Widiantoro
Cracow University of Economics

Abstract

This paper put an attempt to find the impact of money supply, specifically in promoting research and development, of EU countries contributes in successes of startup IPO process. The paper is formulated to prove the hypothesis that the number of money supply in R&D affect the number of IPO within EU countries. This hypothesis comes from the previous research about the impact of patent in reducing asymmetric information of the firm before going to IPO. The model comes from Schumpeter assumption that economic growth is an effect of knowledge accumulation. The data come from 17 countries in Europe. The model is a data panel regression. The variables that used are number of IPO as dependent variable and number of money supply in research and development as independent variable. We use 10 years’ data range period from 2005 until 2014. The paper finds the robust relationship between countries research and development expenses and the number of IPO activities in 17 European countries. This research will contribute in providing empirical research about the relationship between favourable research environment (proxied by money supply in R&D) and firms IPO. The expectation is a government will promote and allocate more fiscal project in research and development.

Keywords

IPO, startup, FDI, investment, Schumpeter

PDF

References

  1. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econo-metrica, 60, 323–351.
  2. Alves, S., & Martins, J. (2010). The Impact of Intangible Assets on Financial and Govern-ance Policies: UK Evidence. International Research Journal of Finance & Econom-ics, 36, 147-169.
  3. Amess, K., Stiebale, J., & Wright, M. (201). The impact of private equity on firms׳patent-ing activity. European Economic Review, 86, 147-160.
  4. Arora, A., & Nandkumar, A. (2011). Cash-out of flameout! Opportunity cost and entre-preneurial strategy: theory, and evidence from the information security industry. Management Science, 57, 1844–1860.
  5. Brown, J.R., Fazzari, S.M., & Petersen, B.C. (2009). Financing innovation and growth: cash flow, external equity, and the 1990s R& D boom. Journal of Finance, 66, 151–185.
  6. Elveness, V., & Widiantoro, D.M. (2012). Managing Risk of Shipping Industry in Finan-cial Market. Journal of Finance and Risk Perspective, 1(1), 10-21.
  7. Galindo, M.-A., & Mendez, M. T. (2014). Entrepreneurship, economic growth, and inno-vation: Are feedback effects at work? Journal of Business Research, 67, 825-829.
  8. Garanina, T., & Pavlova, Y. (2011). Intangible Assets and Value Creation of a Company: Russian and UK Evidence. Proceedings of the European Conference on Intellectual Capital, 165-175.
  9. Gross, N. (2001). Commentary: Valuing ‘intangibles’ is tough job, but it has to be done. Bloomberg, published online: August 6, 2001. Retrieved from: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01_32/b3744008.htm (20.06.2016).
  10. InvestEurope (2015). Venture capital to play central role in Capital Markets Union. Retrieved from: http://www.investeurope.eu/news-opinion/newsroom/press-releases/capital-markets-union-action-plan (20.06.2016).
  11. Lev, B. (2001). Intangibles: management, measurement, and reporting. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
  12. Martins, J., & Alves, S. (2010). The Impact of intangible assets on financial and govern-ance policies: A literature review. Portuguese Journal of Management Studies, 15(1), 87-107.
  13. Nanda, R., & Rhodes-Kropf, M. (2013). Investment Cycles and Startup Innovation. Jour-nal of Financial Economics, 110, 403-418.
  14. Örnek, A.S., & Danyal, Y. (2015). Increased Importance of Entrepreneurship from Entre-preneurship to Techno-Entrepreneurship (Startup): Provided Supports and Conven-iences to Techno-Entrepreneurs in Turkey. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sci-ences, 195, 1146-1155. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.164
  15. Petkov, R.R. (2011). The Current Financial Crisis and Its Potential Impact on Internally Generated Intangible Assets. International Journal of Business & Management, 6(3), 37-44.
  16. Pitchbook (2015). European PE Breakdown 4Q 2015. Retrieved from: https://pitchbook.com/news/reports/4q-2015-european-private-equity-breakdown (20.06.2016).
  17. Pofeldt, E. (2015). The rise of billion-dollar European unicorns. Retrieved from: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/07/european-venture-capitalists-spawn-unicorns.html (20.06.2016).
  18. Ptacek, O., Kaderabkova, B., & Piecha, M. (2015). Venture Capital, Private Equity and Foreign Direct Investment: Case Study of the Czech Republic. IISES 3rd and 4th Economics and Finance Conference, 30, 680-689.
  19. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Cambridge M.A.: Transaction Publishers.
  20. The World Bank (2016). World Bank Open Data. Retrieved from: http://data.worldbank.org (20.06.2016).
  21. Useche, D. (2014). Are patents signals for the IPO market? An EU–US comparison for the software industry. Research Policy, 43(8), 1299-1311. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.respol.2014.04.004.
  22. White, L.J. (2011). Preventing bubbles: What role for financial regulation? Cato Journal, 31(3), 603-619.
  23. Widiantoro, D.M. (2012). Measuring the Role of Intangible Asset toward Company Fi-nancial Health and Agency Conflict. Journal of Finance and Risk Perspective, 1(2), 25-40.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

31-38 of 38

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.