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
A patent is an asset — one with a price associated with it when it comes to procuring a loan for your business. Photo via Getty Images

Rice research: What innovations can be used to borrow against?

Houston voices

For companies and leaders, patents represent important assets. They’re a marker of innovation and tech development. But patents do so much more than protect intellectual property. Firms increasingly deploy them as collateral to secure loans. Between 1995 and 2013, the number of patents pledged as loan collateral increased from about 10,000 to nearly 50,000. Forty percent of U.S. patenting firms have used patents as collateral.

However, patents are intangible assets, and their liquidity and liquidation value are difficult to assess. To evaluate an individual patent, lenders must consider the invention space to which the patent belongs. A patent’s linkage to prior inventions can provide important information for lenders, as the linkage affects the extent to which the patent under consideration may be redeployed and potentially purchased by other firms in the case of loan default.

Rice Business professor Yan Anthea Zhang examined more closely how this market operates and how both lenders and borrowers can make more informed decisions on which patents make appealing collateral. In their paper, “Which patents to use as loan collateral? The role of newness of patents' external technology linkage,” Zhang, who specializes in strategic management, and her co-authors studied the data on 107,180 U.S. semiconductor patents owned by 436 U.S. firms. The team focused on semiconductor patents because the semiconductor industry involves intensive innovation, which leads to many patent applications and grants. The market for semiconductor patents is an active and well-functioning market, given specialization in different stages of the innovation process and the growing technological market. Information on whether a patent was used as loan collateral came from the USPTO Patent Assignments Database.

Zhang and her colleagues argue that lenders prefer patents linked to prior inventions that are relatively new because these patents are riding on recent technology waves and are less likely to become obsolete. As a result, such patents are likely to remain deployable to other firms in the future. However, patents that are based upon too new prior inventions might not prove to be commercially viable and carry higher risk for lenders.

As a result of this research, Zhang and her colleagues found an inverted U-shape relationship to demonstrate the likelihood that a patent will be used as loan collateral. On one end, patents based upon the newest prior inventions, on the other, patents based upon mature prior inventions. The curve of the U-shape represents the sweet spot for patent collateral—the patents’ technological base is new enough to be relevant and competitive with other firms in its invention space, but not so new that it has yet to prove market success.

Zhang’s team also found that the impact of external linkage also varies depending on borrower attributes, especially the borrowers’ expertise in the invention space. If a borrower is a technological leader in the invention space, the market tends to give the borrower credit, and as a result, even if its patents are based upon very new prior inventions, its patents are still likely to be accepted as collateral.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Yan Anthea Zhang, the Fayez Sarofim Vanguard Professor of Management at Rice Business.

Expanding into foreign markets is tempting, but strategic fit can determine success or disaster. Photo via Getty Images

To expand or not to expand? Houston researcher weighs in on global growth

houston voices

You built your business from the ground up, patiently finding techniques and products that work, carefully crafting solid bonds with your clients. Then one day a new project, opportunity or simple request poses a question: Is it time to branch out overseas?

Of the welter of questions to consider, the first and most important involves location: not just the physical location of the prospective expansion site, but the cultural differences between a firm's home country and its new destination. Secondly, key company traits need to be considered in choosing the investment locations. Is your firm large or small? Young or old? Finally, of pivotal importance to companies outside the United States: Is your company privately held or state-owned?

In a recent paper, Rice Business professor Yan Anthea Zhang looked closely at these three variables with Yu Li of the University of International Business and Economics Business School in Beijing, China and Wei Shi of the Miami Business School at the University of Miami. What, the researchers wanted to know, was the relation of these three features and firms' location choices for their overseas investments?

To find out, Zhang and her colleagues analyzed 7,491 Chinese firms that had recently ventured into foreign markets with 9,558 overseas subsidiaries. Because China now has become the world's leading source of foreign direct investments, the sample promised to be instructive. Thanks to the large sample size, researchers could test hypotheses relating to firm size, age, ownership and the impact of geographical and cultural distance on their location choices.

After studying the elements of geographic distance and cultural distance, Zhang and her colleagues uncovered a paradox. Companies that had an advantage in tackling one dimension of distance were actually disadvantaged — because of the same characteristic — in another dimension.

How, exactly, did this paradox work? Larger firms, with access to more resources, can "experiment with new strategies, new products, and new markets," the researchers wrote. This large size makes geographic distance less of a concern, but it comes with a ponderous burden of its own. Company culture is directly influenced by the country of origin, Zhang wrote. Transferring that culture into a completely different environment can cause the kind of shock that could lead to failure, even with financial and physical resources to ease the geographical distance. Conversely, smaller firms may be more nimble and able to adapt to needed cultural changes — but lack the resources to make true inroads in a foreign market.

A similar paradox exists for older and younger firms, Zhang wrote. A younger firm is more likely to adapt to a culturally distant country than an older firm might, even if that youth means that geographical distance is a greater logistical challenge.

State-owned firms face a similar paradox, one that comes down to the balance of resources against cultural flexibility. A company with state-generated resources may be better equipped to move a caravan people, machinery and materials to a distant new location. However, state-owned companies often typically lack the internal cultural flexibility to handle expansion to a different environment.

What does this mean for the average manager? Simply that going global demands meticulous weighing of factors. Does your firm have the practical resources to expand overseas? Does your staff have the personal flexibility and willingness to meld company culture with that of a different milieu? It's a truism that major overseas expansions require money and heavy lifting. Less obviously, managers of successful companies must thread a very fine needle: ensuring they have the material resources to get their business overseas physically, while confirming that company culture is light enough on its feet to thrive in day-to-day life in a new place.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and is based on research from Yan Anthea Zhang, a professor and the Fayez Sarofim Vanguard Chair of Strategy in the Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

UH lands $3M grant to expand opioid overdose training

Overdose Response

The University of Houston has received a $3 million federal grant to expand its potentially life-saving overdose response training program.

The grant will support the Houston Health Department’s FRONTLINES program that trains first responders in Harris and Fort Bend counties to recognize opioid overdoses and administer the drug naloxone, which can counter the effects of an opioid overdose. The four-year grant comes from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services, and it builds on eight years of work at UH, according to a release from the university.

As part of the expansion, UH medical, social work and psychology students will now also be able to take part in FRONTLINES’ overdose-response training. Some of the students will also be selected to help train community members, ultimately passing along the life-saving skills throughout Houston.

FRONTLINES is a collaboration with the City of Houston, the Fertitta College of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine and the Houston Recovery Center. It was co-founded by Dr. James Bray, chair of the Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences at the University of Houston’s Tilman J. Fertitta Family College of Medicine, in 2018.

“When someone experiencing an opioid overdose is reached in time, naloxone can save their life,” Bray said in a news release. “We’ve seen the impact this training can have in Houston, and now we have an opportunity to extend that reach across Harris and Fort Bend counties, putting lifesaving knowledge and tools into the hands of more first responders.”

In 2024, around 450 residents of Harris County died from opioid overdoses, according to a Texas Department of State Health Services report. The report found that fentanyl was involved in about three-quarters of the deaths.

In 2025, UH also received a $2.6 million gift from the estate of Dr. William A. Gibson to expand its opioid research and develop a vaccine to help block fentanyl's effectiveness in entering the brain. The vaccine research is part of the Michael C. Gibson Addiction Research Program led by UH professor of psychology Therese Kosten and founding member of the UH Drug Discovery Institute Colin Haile. Read more about the grant and the vaccine’s development here.

Texas public libraries drive billions in economic impact, report finds

Beyond the Stacks

A new statewide study examining the economic impacts of public libraries has revealed they have generated over $3.8 billion in value to local communities — a return of $4.74 for every $1 invested.

The report, "Beyond the Stacks: Measuring the Economic and Community Value of Texas Public Libraries" was conducted by third-party consultancy JBK Economics Group in partnership with the Texas Library Association. About 300 of the total 513 public libraries in Texas participated in a survey for the report.

A major finding from the survey revealed that public libraries create billions in economic value for the communities they serve at a fraction of what it costs to pay employee wages and benefits, operating expenditures, and capital expenditures. About 11,200 jobs were directly and indirectly supported by public libraries, the report found.

The report found its $4.74 to $1 ratio by adding up the total value of the services provided by these institutions (an estimated $2.48 billion), and comparing it to total expenditures ($808.6 million).

"Public libraries had about the same economic footprint as the Texas motion picture and sound recording industry ($2.9 billion in Gross Domestic Product in 2024) or the Texas paper manufacturing industry ($4.0 billion in Gross Domestic Product in 2024)," the report said.

Many Houstonians are already familiar with Houston Public Library's expansive catalog and programming, but there are many more services the library provides that might fly under the radar. A few examples include access to subscription-based research databases and news outlets, and the Library of Things, a collection of cookware and bake ware, musical instruments, craft kits, and other tools or activity materials that are available for cardholders to borrow. Individual branches also provide free Wi-Fi, computer access, and meeting spaces.

Houston-area residents also have access to services at several other local libraries depending on their address, such as the Harris County Public Library, Montgomery County Memorial Library System, or Fort Bend County Libraries, just to name a few.

These are additional services and partnerships that Texas public libraries commonly provide, per the survey results:

  • 93 percent provide voter registration and/or serve as voting locations
  • 84 percent provide partnerships with local social services agencies
  • 82 percent provide job application assistance
  • 68 percent facilitate applications for government benefits
  • 38 percent provide on-site social services
  • 30 percent provide telehealth rooms and/or resources
"Public libraries are practical, welcoming and rooted in the communities they serve — they are unmistakably Texan," said Texas Library Association executive director Shirley Robinson in a press release. "This study puts a dollar value on the opportunities libraries create every day. Whether someone visits a library to apply for a job, access the internet, learn a new skill or simply find a new favorite book, those services create real value for Texans and their communities."

------

This article first appeared on CultureMap.com.

Rice University launches new venture fund for university-affiliated startups

startup support

Rice University has launched its new One Giant Leap Ventures Fund I, which will invest in the university’s spinouts and alumni-founded startups.

The early-stage institutional venture fund will function with a hybrid structure that allows for participation from traditional equity investors and philanthropic investors. According to the university, the fund will invest up to $500,000 per Rice-affiliated company.

To be considered eligible for funds, companies must use intellectual property licensed by the university or be led or founded by alumni.

One Giant Leap will draw on support and mentorship from Rice’s pool of 60,000 alumni and aims to create educational opportunities within the investment phases, work with graduate and undergraduate venture students, explore the scaling and commercialization of their ideas, and help investigate all the facets of venture capital.

“Rice alumni bring an extraordinary depth of experience as entrepreneurs, investors and industry leaders, and One Giant Leap creates new ways to put that expertise to work for the next generation of Rice innovators,” Stephen Bayer, vice president for development and alumni relations, said in a news release. “It strengthens the connection between our alumni and the university while giving them meaningful opportunities to mentor, advise and support Rice-affiliated companies as they grow.”

The fund held its first close in August and made its first investment into Rice brain health spinout Motif Neurotech. Led by Rice faculty member Jacob Robinson, Motif is working to commercialize a minimally invasive neurostimulator that targets treatment-resistant depression. In May, the FDA approved the company to move forward with its first clinical trial.

“Research produces breakthrough technologies and our academic environment forms outstanding entrepreneurs,” said Adrian Trömel, the fund’s managing director, a Rice alumnus and a startup founder who also serves as Rice’s interim chief innovation officer.

One Giant Leap joins the already long list of Rice-led programs that foster innovation, including the Liu Idea Labs for Innovation and Entrepreneurship’s Innovation Fellows and Summer Venture Studio, the Rice Alliance’s Business Plan Competition, the Ion District, Woodside Rice Decarbonization Accelerator, Rice Nexus, the Biotech Launchpad and RBL Ventures and its upcoming 200,000 square-foot research lab the Arc.

“With One Giant Leap, I am excited that we are creating a unique structure that brings together traditional investment and philanthropic participation to invest in and help catalyze our startups, engage the deep expertise within the Rice ecosystem and transform those strengths into real-world impact,” Trömel added in the release.

View All Listings