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

Houston lands $14M in latest CPRIT grants to advance cancer, lab-on-chip research

cancer funding

Thanks to a $4 million grant from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, the University of Houston has recruited a top-tier researcher developing AI-powered lab-on-a-chip technology for early cancer detection.

Tianhong Cui, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities and an adjunct professor of physiology and biomedical engineering at the Mayo Clinic, specializes in microelectromechanical systems and advanced manufacturing at microscale and nanoscale levels. In addition to lab-on-a-chip systems, Cui focuses on biosensors and water sensors.

Lab-on-a-chip devices deliver big results in a tiny package

The CPRIT grant supports Cui’s development of a microscale lab-on-a-chip system for early cancer detection and post-therapy monitoring.

“Lab-on-a-chip technology crams an entire lab’s worth of functions into a tiny device roughly the size of a USB stick,” according to Built In.

Common uses for the technology include medical diagnostics, point-of-care testing, and environmental monitoring.

Lab-on-a-chip work being carried out at UH and elsewhere in Houston promises to revolutionize cancer detection and treatment. For instance, Houston biotech company iBiochips, a spinout from the Houston Methodist Research Institute, makes lab-on-a-chip devices that bolster cancer detection and therapy.

Four local organizations gain $10 million in CPRIT grants

Four other Houston-area organizations received an additional $10 million in grants in CPRIT’s latest round of funding:

  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center received two $2 million grants to recruit researchers Zheqi Li of Harvard University’s Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Nikolaos Koundouros of Weill Cornell Medicine.
  • Rice University received one $2 million grant to recruit researcher Maria Akoppyan, formerly of the University of Southern California.
  • UT Medical Branch at Galveston received one $2 million grant to recruit researcher Cristina Santarossa of Johns Hopkins University.
  • Houston-based biopharma company Pulmotect received one $2 million grant to support better outcomes for cancer patients by activating immunity in the lungs as a first line of defense against germs.

The funding was part of $35 million in new CPRIT grants for institutions and companies across Texas approved at the organization's most recent meeting. To date, CPRIT has awarded more than $4.2 billion in grants.

“These awards support research across the cancer continuum from prevention to new classes of therapeutics,” said Dr. Scott Hiebert, chief scientific officer of CPRIT, said in a news release. “The work of these investigators will impact the lives of Texans across the state.”

2 Houston high schools soar as America's best for 2026, says U.S. News

Honor Roll

Houston ISD's Carnegie Vanguard High School is standing tall as one of the 25 best high schools in America, according to U.S. News and World Report's 2026-2027 Best High Schools rankings.

DeBakey High School for Health Professions also ranks among the top 100 nationally, and 23 more Houston-area schools join them at the top of the class in Texas.

Each year, U.S. News evaluates approximately 27,000 public high schools on six factors: college readiness, college curriculum breadth, state assessment proficiency, state assessment performance, underserved student performance, and graduation rates.

The highest ranking public schools provide the best educational environments where "students demonstrated outstanding outcomes above expectations in math, reading and science state assessments, earned qualifying scores on an array of college-level exams, and graduated in high proportions."

"Every student deserves a pathway to success, and that journey often begins with selecting the right school," said LaMont Jones, Ed.D., managing editor for education at U.S. News. "The 2026-2027 Best High Schools rankings empower families with the valuable data and transparency they need to help make the best educational choices for them. We are proud to offer this essential resource to help shape the next generation of college-ready students."

Top ranking Houston schools
Carnegie Vanguard High School once again leads in Texas as the No. 2 best high school, and soared as No. 25 in U.S. News' national list of the best high schools, up from No. 42 last year.

DeBakey High School for Health Professions is the 9th best high school in Texas and ranks No. 91 nationally (down from No. 75 last year).

Three more local schools ranked among the best STEM schools in the country: Memorial High School in Spring Branch ISD (No. 86), Seven Lakes High School in Katy ISD (No. 96), and Dulles High School in Fort Bend ISD (No. 99).

In U.S. News' ranking of the best charter schools, four Houston-area schools made the top 100: Spring Branch ISD's Westchester Academy for International Studies (No. 62), Harmony School of Innovation - Katy (No. 72), Harmony School of Discovery - Houston (No. 78), and YES Prep - North Central (No. 100).

Other Houston-area schools that rank among the 100 best in Texas are:

  • No. 17 – Kerr High School, Alief ISD, Houston
  • No. 24 – Young Women's College Prep Academy, Houston ISD
  • No. 25 – Kinder High School for Performing and Visual Arts, Houston ISD
  • No. 31 – Challenge Early College High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 39 – Westchester Academy for International Studies, Spring Branch ISD, Houston
  • No. 44 – Tomball Star Academy, Tomball ISD
  • No. 45 – Harmony School of Innovation - Katy
  • No. 46 – North Houston Early College High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 51 – Eastwood Academy, Houston ISD
  • No. 52 – Seven Lakes High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 54 – Harmony School of Discovery - Houston
  • No. 55 – Energy Institute High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 56 – Spring Early College Academy, Spring ISD
  • No. 63 – Sharpstown International School, Houston ISD
  • No. 66 – YES Prep - North Central, Houston
  • No. 73 – Tompkins High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 76 – YES Prep - Southeast, Houston
  • No. 80 – Harmony School of Innovation - Sugar Land
  • No. 81 – Clements High School, Fort Bend ISD, Sugar Land
  • No. 82 – Houston Academy for International Studies, Houston ISD
  • No. 86 – Jordan High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 88 – Victory Early College High School, Aldine ISD, Houston
  • No. 96 – Clear Horizons Early College High School, Clear Creek ISD, Houston

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Intuitive Machines lands $600M satellite deal, NASA ‘spacecraft bus’ contract

space deals

Houston-based space infrastructure company Intuitive Machines has scored two astronomical deals.

The deals add to the company’s soaring success. As of June 30, Intuitive Machines had a record-high $1.8 billion backlog of orders, a $1.5 billion increase from the end of last year. The current backlog includes orders for more than 80 spacecraft.

The company, which went public in 2023, expects this year’s revenue to total $900 million to $1 billion. In the first half of 2026, Intuitive Machines generated nearly $393 million in revenue.

Intuitive Machines estimates its total available market is valued at more than $150 billion.

$600 million-plus deal represents ‘important milestone’

On Monday, Intuitive Machines said it picked up a $600 million-plus deal to develop three commercial satellites for an undisclosed customer over the course of about two years.

Intuitive Machines says it will design, manufacture, set up and support several spacecraft “for a critical communications infrastructure mission.”

Steve Altemus, the company’s CEO, says the deal represents “an important milestone for Intuitive Machines and reflects the confidence our customers place in our ability to deliver high-performance spacecraft for a broad range of mission needs.”

Company nails down NASA deal for ‘spacecraft bus’

A day after announcing the $600 million-plus deal, Intuitive Machines said it secured a new contract with NASA.

Intuitive Machines says NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California will use the company’s IM 300 “spacecraft bus” for an EAGLE-VSWIR Earth observation mission. The mission is scheduled to launch in 2028.

Aside from supplying the IM 300 bus, Intuitive Machines will carry out mission support services.

The low-Earth-orbit mission will be equipped with Intuitive Machines’ hyperspectral visible to shortwave infrared (VSWIR) instrument. This technology sees colors and details that aren’t visible to the human eye.

The instrument is “designed to perform surface biology and geology observations from Earth orbit while demonstrating technologies that could support future lunar and Mars exploration missions,” Intuitive Machines says.

Intuitive Machines builds mission-critical spacecraft, systems, and infrastructure for business and government customers. To date, the company has produced more than 300 spacecraft, delivered over 575 pounds of payload to the moon and launched about 100 satellites.

View All Listings