How to evaluate an IPO, according to Houston researchers

houston voices

In emerging markets, pricing — not reputation — drives the partnership between underwriter and IPO. Photo via business.rice.edu

Many investors assume they can judge the strength of an IPO based on the reputation of the underwriter supporting it.

However, a recent study by Rice Business professors Anthea Zhang and Haiyang Li, along with Jin Chen (Nottingham University) and Jing Jin (University of International Business and Economics), proves this is only sometimes true — depending on how mature the stock exchange is.

Getting your company listed on the stock market is a big step. It opens new opportunities to raise money and grow the business. But it also means facing increased regulations, reporting requirements and public scrutiny.

To successfully launch an initial public offering (IPO), most companies hire “underwriters” — financial services firms — to guide them through the complex process. Because underwriters have expertise in valuations, filing paperwork and promoting to investors, they play a crucial role in ushering companies onto the market.

In well-established markets like the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), an underwriter’s reputation carries immense weight with investors. Top-tier banks like Goldman Sachs have built their reputations by rigorously vetting and partnering with only the most promising companies. When Goldman Sachs takes on the role of underwriter, it sends a strong signal to potential investors that the IPO has met stringent standards. After all, a firm of Goldman’s caliber would not risk tarnishing its hard-earned reputation by associating with subpar companies.

Conversely, IPO firms recognize the value of having a prestigious underwriter. Such an association lends credibility and prestige, enhancing the company’s appeal. In a mature market environment, the underwriter’s reputation correlates to the IPO’s potential, benefiting both the investors who seek opportunities and the companies wanting to make a strong public debut.

However, assumptions about an underwriter’s reputation only hold true if the stock exchange is mature. In emerging or less developed markets, the reputation of an underwriter has no bearing on the quality or potential of the IPO it pairs with.

In an emerging market, the study finds, investors should pay attention to how much the underwriter charges a given IPO for their services. The higher the fee, the riskier it would be to invest in the IPO firm.

To arrive at their findings, the researchers leveraged a unique opportunity in China’s ChiNext Exchange. When ChiNext opened in 2009, regulations were low. Banks faced little consequence for underwriting a substandard IPO. Numerous IPOs on ChiNext were discovered to have engaged in accounting malpractice and inaccurate reporting, resulting in financial losses for investors and eroding confidence in the capital markets. So, for 18 months during 2012-2013, ChiNext closed. When it reopened, exchange reforms were stricter. And suddenly, underwriter reputation became a more reliable marker of IPO quality.

“Our research shows how priorities evolve as markets mature,” Zhang says. “In a new or developing exchange without established regulations, underwriter fees paid by IPO firms dictate the underwriter-company partnership. But as markets reform and mature, reputation and quality become the driving factors.”

The study makes a critical intervention in the understanding of market mechanisms. The findings matter for companies, investors and regulators across societies, highlighting how incentives shift, markets evolve and economic systems work.

The research opens the door to other areas of inquiry. For example, future studies could track relationships between underwriters and companies to reveal the long-term impacts of reputation, fees and rule changes. Research along these lines could help identify best practices benefiting all market participants.

“In the future, researchers could explore how cultural norms, regulations and investor behaviors influence IPO success,” says Li. “Long-term studies on specific underwriter-firm pairs could reveal insights into investor confidence and market stability. Understanding these dynamics can benefit companies, investors and policymakers alike.”

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Yan “Anthea” Zhang, the Fayez Sarofim Vanguard Professor of Management – Strategic Management at Rice Business, and Haiyang Li, the H. Joe Nelson III Professor of Management – Strategic Management at Rice Business.

From Your Site Articles
People tend to have stronger reactions to unexpected news, so news that meets the public’s expectations of a company can go unnoticed. Photo via Getty Images

Houston research: How best to deliver unexpected news as a company

houston voices

According to Forbes, the volume of mergers and acquisitions in 2021 was the highest on record, and 2022 has already seen a number of major consolidation attempts. Microsoft’s acquisition of video game company Activision Blizzard was the biggest gaming industry deal in history, according to Reuters. JetBlue recently won the bid over Frontier Airlines to merge with Spirit Airlines. And, perhaps most notably, Elon Musk recently backed out of an attempt to acquire Twitter.

It can be hard to predict how markets will react to such high-profile deals (and, in Elon Musk and Twitter’s case, whether or not the deal will even pan out). But Rice Business Professor Haiyang Li and Professor Emeritus Robert Hoskisson, along with Jing Jin of the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, have found that companies can take advantage of these deals to buffer the effects of other news.

The researchers looked at 7,575 mergers and acquisitions from 2001 to 2015, with a roughly half-and-half split between positive and negative stock market reactions. They found that when there’s a negative reaction to a deal, companies have two strategies for dealing with it. If it’s a small negative reaction, companies will release positive news announcements in an attempt to soften the blow. But when the reaction is really bad, companies actually tend to announce more negative news afterward. Specifically, companies released 18% less positive news and 52% more negative news after a bad market reaction.

This may seem counterintuitive, but there’s a method to the madness, and it all has to do with managing expectations. If people are lukewarm on a company due to a merger or acquisition, it’s possible to sway public opinion with unrelated good news. When the backlash is severe, though, a little bit of good PR won’t be enough to change people’s minds. In this case, companies release more bad news because it’s one of their best chances to do so without making waves in the future. If people already think poorly of a company due to a recent deal, more bad news isn’t great, but it doesn’t come as a surprise, either. Therefore, it’s easier to ignore.

It might make more sense to just keep quiet if the market reaction to a deal is bad, and this study found that most companies do. However, this only applies when releasing more news would make a mildly bad situation worse. If things are already bad enough that the company can’t recover with good news, it can still make the best out of a bad situation by offloading more bad news when the damage will be minimal. Companies are legally obligated to disclose business-related news or information with shareholders and with the public. If it’s bad news, they like to share it when the public is already upset about a deal, instead of releasing the negative news when there are no other distractions. In this case the additional negative news is likely to get more play in the media when disclosed by itself.

But what happens when people get excited about a merger or acquisition? In these cases, it also depends on how strong the sentiment is. If the public’s reaction is only minimally positive, companies may opt to release more good news in hopes of making the reaction stronger. When the market is already enthusiastic about the deal, though, companies won’t release more positive news. The researchers found that after an especially positive market reaction to a deal, companies indeed released 12% less positive news but 56% more negative news. Also, one could argue that the contrasting negative news makes the good news on the acquisition look even better. This may be important especially if the acquisition is a significant strategic move.

There are several reasons why a company wouldn’t continue to release positive news after a good press day and strong market reaction. First of all, they want to make sure that a rise in market price is attributed to the deal alone, and not any irrelevant news. A positive reaction to a deal also gives companies another opportunity to disclose bad news at a time when it will get less attention. If the bad news does get attention, the chances are better that stakeholders will go easy on them — a little bit of bad press is forgivable when the good news outshines it.

Companies may choose to release no news after a positive reaction to a merger or acquisition, the same way they might opt to stay quiet after backlash. They’re less likely to release positive news when stakeholders are already happy, preferring to save that news for the next time they need it, either to offset a negative reaction or strengthen a weak positive reaction.

Mergers and acquisitions can produce unpredictable market reactions, so it’s important for companies to be prepared for a variety of outcomes. In fact, Jin, Li and Hoskisson found that the steps taken by companies before deals were announced didn’t have much effect on the public’s reaction. They found that it’s more important for companies to make the best out of that reaction, whatever it turns out to be.

The researchers also found that, regardless of whether the market reaction was positive or negative, as long as the reaction was strong, companies could use the opportunity to hide smaller pieces of bad news in the shadow of a headline-making deal. Overall, the magnitude of the reaction mattered more than the type of reaction. People tend to have stronger reactions to unexpected news, though, so companies prefer to release negative news when market expectations are already low.

These findings are relevant beyond merger announcements, of course; they also point to strategies that could be useful in everyday communications. A key takeaway is that negative information is less upsetting when people already expect bad things — or when it comes after much bigger, and much better, news. Bad news is always hard to deliver, but this research gives us a few ways to soften the blow.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Jing Jin, Haiyang Li and Robert Hoskisson.

Firms looking to expand globally need to ensure that their organizational resources are adaptable to new markets. Getty Images

Houston startups planning to go global need to prioritize adaptability, researchers find

Houston voices

When foreigners invest in emerging markets, the prospect for those markets' local businesses looks bright. The payoffs for a country's companies can range from injections of foreign capital to better managerial talent, technological sophistication and international know-how. But does foreign investment ever push local firms to venture into international projects of their own?

Rice Business professor Haiyang Li looked closely at the ripple effects of foreign investments, and concluded it all depends on the local businesses' adaptability. That — and their appetite for risk.

Together with Xiwei Yi of Peking University and Geng Cui of Lingan University, Hong Kong, Li launched a large-scale study of Chinese manufacturers to better understand how multinational investment in domestic companies influences the global market.

The subject was ripe for analysis. Over the past decade, more and more companies in China and other emerging markets have been testing the waters of direct investment in other countries in sectors as varied as food and beverages, apparel, electronics and transportation equipment.

Li's team hypothesized that these emerging market companies were leveraging benefits that foreign investment had ferried into their home markets. This investment, the researchers theorized, had brought in useful resources and skills, which helped ease the local companies into international business markets.

To confirm this, the team needed to test whether the converse was true: Might information gained from foreign investors actually dull a local firm's interest in branching out overseas? Maybe the risks of that type of venture — which are higher for firms in emerging markets — would seem too stark.

To find out, the researchers first vetted the literature on inward and outward investment activities. How, they wanted to know, did domestic firms interact with foreign players in the technology or product importing process? In equipment manufacturing? In franchising and licensing, mergers and acquisitions and activities such as setting up subsidiaries?

Working with a global research company, Li and his colleagues next surveyed 1,500 Chinese businesses in the food, clothing, electronics and vehicle industries. (Firms in finance, banking, natural resources and business services were ruled out because of their government ties, and also because such organizations usually use fewer resources, which made them harder to evaluate.)

Each company that took part in the survey rated how much they engaged with foreign investors in activities such as importing products and services or forming joint ventures. They also indicated if dealing with foreign direct investment had brought them foreign capital, advanced manufacturing know-how, managerial experience or competitive insight into overseas business.

The researchers also measured the "fungibility" of these firms' resources — in other words, how easily could their organizational, cultural and technological resources be adapted to various geographical settings?

Finally, managers rated how risk-prone they thought their firms were.

After Li and his coauthors processed the answers, they found several links between foreign investment in domestic firms and local companies' internationalization efforts.

First, there was a positive relationship between the local gains from foreign investment and a firm's interest in internationalization projects. While this effect was indirect, it was amplified when foreign investment gave a firm new capabilities that made it more adaptable. In other words, the Chinese companies whose contact with foreign multinationals made them more adaptable in general were better positioned to prosper in ventures abroad.

This stands to reason, the researchers note. That's because by its very nature foreign investment sparks awareness of new opportunities: every business trip, plant visit or negotiation with foreign partners is a hands-on lesson in international trade.

But the researchers also uncovered a significant downside to foreign investment for local Chinese firms. When a project was considered high-risk, such as a merger or establishment of a wholly owned subsidiary, the local firms were less prone to venture abroad. This adverse effect was worse for firms that labeled themselves risk-averse, probably because exposure to foreign investors only made the risks of internationalizing clearer.

These findings add important detail to the way foreign investment can affect their local partners' own international plans — for good and ill. Already, businesses in emerging markets are used to optimizing resources, wrangling diverse idioms and artisans and adapting logistically to get their products to market. That nimbleness, Li and his colleagues propose, should also be seen as a globalization tool. For businesses in emerging markets, the researchers conclude, day-to-day technical ability is actually less important than cultural and organizational flexibility — and applying lessons learned from foreign investors to their own projects abroad.

In other words, for firms in emerging markets, globalization is not just a path to new markets. It's a way to study interactions with foreign firms while on their home turf – and learn how to apply those lessons abroad.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Haiyang Li is Area Coordinator and Professor of Strategic Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Rice University scientists invent new algorithm to fight Alzheimer's

A Seismic Breakthrough

A new breakthrough from researchers at Rice University could unlock the genetic components that determine several human diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.

Alzheimer's disease affected 57 million people worldwide in 2021, and cases in the United States are expected to double in the next couple of decades. Despite its prevalence and widespread attention of the condition, the full mechanisms are still poorly understood. One hurdle has been identifying which brain cells are linked to the disease.

For years, it was thought that the cells most linked with Alzheimer's pathology via DNA evidence were microglia, infection-fighting cells in the brain. However, this did not match with actual studies of Alzheimer's patients' brains. It's the memory-making cells in the human brain that are implicated in the pathology.

To prove this link, researchers at Rice, alongside Boston University, developed a computational algorithm called “Single-cell Expression Integration System for Mapping Genetically Implicated Cell Types," or SEISMIC. It allows researchers to zero in on specific neurons linked to Alzheimer's, the first of its kind. Qiliang Lai, a Rice doctoral student and the lead author of a paper on the discovery published in Nature Communications, believes that this is an important step in the fight against Alzheimer's.

“As we age, some brain cells naturally slow down, but in dementia — a memory-loss disease — specific brain cells actually die and can’t be replaced,” said Lai. “The fact that it is memory-making brain cells dying and not infection-fighting brain cells raises this confusing puzzle where DNA evidence and brain evidence don’t match up.”

Studying Alzheimer's has been hampered by the limitations of computational analysis. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) map small differences in the DNA of Alzheimer's patients. The genetic signal in these studies would often over-emphasize the presence of infection fighting cells, essentially making the activity of those cells too "loud" statistically to identify other factors. Combined with greater specificity in brain regional activity, SEISMIC reduces the data chatter to grant a clearer picture of the genetic component of Alzheimer's.

“We built our SEISMIC algorithm to analyze genetic information and match it precisely to specific types of brain cells,” Lai said. “This enables us to create a more detailed picture of which cell types are affected by which genetic programs.”

Though the algorithm is not in and of itself likely to lead to a cure or treatment for Alzheimer's any time soon, the researchers say that SEISMIC is already performing significantly better than existing tools at identifying important disease-relevant cellular signals more clearly.

“We think this work could help reconcile some contradicting patterns in the data pertaining to Alzheimer’s research,” said Vicky Yao, assistant professor of computer science and a member of the Ken Kennedy Institute at Rice. “Beyond that, the method will likely be broadly valuable to help us better understand which cell types are relevant in different complex diseases.”

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

5 incubators and accelerators fueling the growth of Houston startups

meet the finalists

Houston is home to numerous accelerators and incubators that support founders in pushing their innovative startups and technologies forward.

As part of our 2025 Houston Innovation Awards, the new Incubator/Accelerator of the Year category honors a local incubator or accelerator that is championing and fueling the growth of Houston startups.

Five incubators and accelerators have been named finalists for the 2025 award. They support startups ranging from hard-tech companies to digital health startups.

Read more about these organizations below. Then join us at the Houston Innovation Awards on Nov. 13 at Greentown Labs, when the winner will be unveiled.

Get your tickets now on sale for this exclusive event celebrating Houston Innovation.

Activate

Hard tech incubator Activate supports scientists in "the outset of their entrepreneurial journey." The Houston hub was introduced last year, and joins others in Boston, New York, and Berkley, California—where Activate is headquartered. It named its second Houston cohort this summer.

This year, the incubator grew to include its largest number of concurrent supported fellows, with 88 companies currently being supported nationally. In total, Activate has supported 296 fellows who have created 236 companies. Those companies have raised over $4 billion in follow-on funding, according to Activate. In Houston, it has supported several Innovation Awards finalists, including Solidec, Bairitone Health and Deep Anchor Solutions. It is led locally by Houston Managing Director Jeremy Pitts.

EnergyTech Nexus

Cleantech startup hub EnergyTech Nexus' mission is to accelerate the energy transition by connecting founders, investors and industrial stakeholders and helping to develop transformative companies, known as "thunderlizards."

The hub was founded in 2023 by CEO Jason Ethier, Juliana Garaizar and Nada Ahmed. It has supported startups including Capwell Services, Resollant, Syzygy Plasmonics, Hertha Metals, EarthEn Energy and Solidec—many of which are current or past Innovation Awards finalists. This year Energy Tech Nexus launched its COPILOT Accelerator, powered by Wells Fargo Innovation Incubator (IN²) at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). COPILOT partners with Browning the Green Space, a nonprofit that promotes diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the clean energy and climatech sectors. Energy Tech Nexus also launched its Liftoff fundraising program, its Investor Program, and a "strategic ecosystem partnership" with Greentown Labs.

Greentown Labs

Climatetech incubator Greentown Labs offers its community resources and a network to climate and energy innovation startups looking to grow. The collaborative community offers members state-of-the-art prototyping labs, business resources and access to investors and corporate partners. The co-located incubator was first launched in Boston in 2011 before opening in Houston in 2021.

Greentown has seen major changes and activity this year. In February, Greentown announced Georgina Campbell Flatter as its new CEO, along with a new Board of Directors. In July, it announced Lawson Gow as its Head of Houston, a "dedicated role to champion the success of Greentown Houston’s startups and lead Greentown’s next chapter of impact in the region," according to Greentown. It has since announced numerous new partnerships, including those with Energy Tech Nexus, Los Angeles-based software development firm Nominal, to launch the new Industrial Center of Excellence; and Houston-based Shoreless, to launch an AI lab onsite. Greentown Houston has supported 175 startups since its launch in 2021, with 45 joining in the last two years. Those startups include the likes of Hertha Metals, RepAir Carbon, Solidec, Eclipse Energy (formerly GoldH2) and many others.

Healthtech Accelerator (TMCi)

The Healthtech Accelerator, formerly TMCx, focuses on clinical partnerships to improve healthcare delivery and outcomes. Emerging digital health and medical device startups that join the accelerator are connected with a network of TMC hospitals and seasoned advisors that will prepare them for clinical validation, funding and deployment.

The Healthtech Accelerator is part of Texas Medical Center Innovation, which also offers the TMCi Accelerator for Cancer Therapeutics. The Healthtech Accelerator named its 19th, and latest, cohort of 11 companies last month.

Impact Hub Houston

Impact Hub Houston supports early-stage ventures at various stages of development through innovative programs that address pressing societal issues. The nonprofit organization supports social impact startups through mentorship, connections and training opportunities.

There are more than 110 Impact Hubs globally with 24,000-plus members spanning 69 countries, making it one of the world’s largest communities for accelerating entrepreneurial solutions toward the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

---

The Houston Innovation Awards program is sponsored by Houston City College Northwest, Houston Powder Coaters, FLIGHT by Yuengling, and more to be announced soon. For sponsorship opportunities, please contact sales@innovationmap.com.



Rice University launches  engineering-led brain science and health institute

brain research

Rice University has announced the creation of a new interdisciplinary center known as the Rice Brain Institute (RBI).

The new hub will aim to use engineering, natural sciences and social sciences to research the brain and reduce the burden of neurodegenerative, neurodevelopmental and mental health disorders.

“The Rice Brain Institute reflects Rice’s strength in collaboration without boundaries,” Rachel Kimbro, dean of the School of Social Sciences, said in a news release. “Our researchers are not only advancing fundamental science but they’re also ensuring that knowledge reaches society in ways that promote human flourishing.”

RBI researchers will work in thematic clusters focusing on neurodegeneration, mental health, brain injury and neurodevelopment. The clusters will work toward goals such as significantly improving key brain health outcomes, reducing mortality and mental health disorders and improving quality of life for patients living with brain injuries and neurodevelopmental disorders, according to Rice.

The institute will focus on “engineering-driven innovation,” rather than traditional neuroscience, to design tools that can measure, model and modulate brain activity based around Rice’s expertise in soft robotics, neuroimaging, data science and artificial intelligence—making it unique among peer organizations, according to Rice.

Additionally, RBI will be structured around three collaborative Rice “pillars”:

  • The Neuroengineering Initiative, launched in 2018, brings together neuroscience, engineering, and related fields experts
  • The Neuroscience Initiative, a new initiative that brings together cell biologists, neurobiologists, biochemists, chemists and physicists to explore fundamental mechanisms of the brain and nervous system
  • The Brain and Society Initiative, also a new initiative, considers brain research within the broader social and policy landscape

Rice’s Neuroengineering Initiative has already garnered more than $78 million in research funding, according to Rice, and has established major partnerships, like the Rice-Houston Methodist Center for Neural Systems Restoration.

“Rice is uniquely equipped to bridge and connect scientific understanding of the brain and behavior sciences with the technologies and policies that shape our world,” Amy Dittmar, the Howard R. Hughes Provost and executive vice president for academic affairs, added in the news release. “By uniting faculty in neuroengineering, neuroscience and psychological sciences, this interdisciplinary hub embodies the kind of bold, nimble collaboration that allows Rice to turn discovery into societal impact to save lives and enhance human flourishing.”

The formation of the RBI coincides with recent support of the Dementia Prevention Research Institute of Texas (DPRIT), which landed voter approval earlier this week and aims to make Texas the center for dementia research via brain-health tech. According to the World Economic Forum, brain disorders and mental health disorders cost the global economy an estimated $5 trillion per year and could be as high as $16 trillion by 2030.

“Few areas of research have as direct and profound an impact on human well-being as brain health,” Rice President Reginald DesRoches added in the news release. “As rates of Alzheimer’s, dementia and other neurological diseases rise in our country and around the world, universities have a responsibility to lead the discovery of solutions that preserve memory, movement and quality of life. We all know someone who has been affected by a brain-related health issue, so this research is personal to all of us.”

View All Listings