English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Dual-class firms face great criticism as it is believed that firms choose this structure to expropriate minority shareholders’ wealth. We compare market performance of Chinese dual-class firms with their single-class counterparts by constructing a list of Chinese firms cross-listed on U.S. exchanges. We find, contrary to the literature, that Chinese dual-class firms are outperforming in terms of market performance measured by Tobin’s Q, P/E ratio, and abnormal return in both subsequent years after the initial public offering (IPO). The reason for contrary results is that Chinese dual-class firms bond themselves to high U.S. standards from low local Chinese standards, and it is evident from the literature that when a firm bonds itself to high standards it shows a credible commitment towards minority shareholders’ rights, as well as focus on upright performance rather than investing in value-destroying projects and competes to survive in the market that imposes the high standards

Effect of Disproportional Voting Rights on Firm’s Market Performance: Evidence from Chinese Firms Cross-Listed on U.S. Exchanges