1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 宏碁對機構投資人的管理與溝通
How Acer manages and communicates with institutional shareholders?
作者 許家維
貢獻者 周行一
Edward Chow
許家維
關鍵詞 機構投資人
投資人關係
委託書
宏碁
股東會
股權服務機構
institutional investors
investor relationship
proxy
Acer
annual general meeting
proxy service institutions
日期 2013
上傳時間 1-Jul-2014 12:05:50 (UTC+8)
摘要 2001年宏碁公司組織改組後營運表現良好，2003年起外資法人大量買入宏碁股票，讓宏碁的股東結構轉變成以外資法人為主體，因此宏碁無法僅靠向國內一般投資人徵求委託書的傳統方式完成股東會。過往在台灣有許多法規面與資訊面上的問題，讓外資法人難以參與股東會及投票表示意見，如此一來對機構投資人持有股份逾半的宏碁便急需要尋找方法確保股東會能夠順利召開。宏碁必須要了解機構投資人買進的目的並建立溝通管道，為外資法人排除投票障礙，以確保公司能正常運作。本研究探討不同類型機構投資人的選股決策和其買進股票後對宏碁的影響，以及宏碁如何管理不同以往的股東結構和建立持續性的溝通機制。藉由股權服務機構ISS(Institutional Shareholder Service)、Broadridge投票平台與The Altman Group的建議，宏碁加強自1998年成立的IR團隊功能，並且提高資訊揭露標準與國際接軌。2005年時成功在機構投資人持股逾半的情況下，全體出席者無異議通過股東會所有議案。2008年台灣開始實施員工分紅費用化後，以發放股票作為員工報酬的成本提高，公司少了一項給予優秀人才報酬的方式，對於人才留任相當不利，發行折價員工認股權憑證議案便在此時空背景下出現。但因此議案牽涉到股權性質的報酬，ISS的態度為採取個案探討，並未在每年度ISS全球地區性的投票綱領中給予方向性的意見。詹浩憑藉著過去3年與ISS合作的經驗與來自The Altman Group的幫助，設計出讓ISS消除疑慮的折價員工認股權憑證架構，並於股東會上連續三年順利通過發行案，可說是台灣企業與機構投資人溝通和管理的典範。
參考文獻 TEJ台灣經濟新報
     
     台灣證券交易所
     
     法源法律網
     
     全國法規資料庫
     
     中華民國公開發行公司股務協會，馮震宇等人合著，股東會通訊投票實務作業問題探討，2009年10月
     
     台灣集中保管所稽核室，股東會委託書徵求作業宣導說明會，2011年3月
     
     資誠會計事務所，薛明玲編著，公開發行公司董事會及股東會決議事項，2012年2月
     
     中華公司治理協會編著，股東會電子投票實務手冊，2012年4月
     
     Asia Corporate Governance Association (ACGA) Hong Kong, Charles Lee, Jamie Allen, ACGA White Paper on Corporate Governance in Taiwan, 2011
     
     Brennan, M., and C. Tamarowski. ,2000, Investor Relations, Liquidity, and Stock Prices.Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 12, 26-37.
     
     Bushee, B.J, 1998, the Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior. Vol.73, No. 3, pp. 305-333
     
     Bushee, B.J, and Gregory S. Miller ,2012, Investor Relations, Firm Visibility, and Investor Following. The Accounting Review: May , Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 867-897.
     
     Bushee, B.J., and C.F. Noe.,2000, Corporate Disclosure Practices, Institutional Investors, and Stock Return Volatility. Journal of Accounting Research, 38, 171-202
     
     Chung, K.H;J. Elder; and J. –C. Kim.,2010, Corporate Governance and Liquidity. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45, 265-291
     
     Falkenstein, E. G.,1995, Preferences for Stock Characteristics as Revealed by Mutual Fund Portfolio Holdings. Jounal of Finance, 51,111-135
     
     Gillian,S.L. and Starks, L.T.,2000, Corporate Governance Proposals and Shareholder activism: The Role of Institutional Investors. Journal of Financial Economics, 57, 275-305
     
     Gompers, P.A., and A. Metrick ,2001,. Institutional Investors and Equity Prices, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 229-259
     
     Gompers, P.A.; J.L. Ishii; and A. Metrick.,2003, Corporate governance and Equity Prices, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 107-155
     
     Grinstein, Y., and R. Michaely.,2005, Institutional Holdings and Payout Policy. Journal of Finance, 60,1389-1426
     Harvard Business Review, Focusing capital on the long term., January-February 2014
     
     Harvard Business Review, Institutional investors: The reluctant activists. January-February 1994
     
     Huang, J,2009,. Dynamic Liquidity Preferences of Mutual Funds. Working Paper, Boston College
     
     Hong, H., and M. Huang.,2003, Talking up Liquidity: Insider Trading and Investor Relations. Working Paper, Stanford University.
     
     Jensen C. and Meckling H.,1976, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, October, V. 3, No. 4, pp. 305-360.
     
     Kee H. Chung and Hao Zhang.,2011, Corporate Governance and Institutional Ownership. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46, 247-273
     
     Merton, R.C.,1987, A Simple model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information. Journal of Finance, 42, 483-510
     
     Parrino, R.;R. W. Sias; and L. T. Starks.,2003, Voting with Their Feet: Institutional Ownership Changes around Forced CEO Turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 68, 3-46
     
     Shleifer A. and Robert W. Vishny.,1997, A Survey of Corporate Governance. The Journal of Finance, 52 , pp. 737-783
     
     Tilba A. and McNulty T.,2013, Engaged versus Disengaged Ownership: The Case of Pension Funds in the UK. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21, 165-182
     
     Wolter Kluwer,2012, Commentaries and Cases on the LAW OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATION, Fourth Edition
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
財務管理研究所
101357035
102
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101357035
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 周行一zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Edward Chowen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 許家維zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 許家維zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2013en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Jul-2014 12:05:50 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Jul-2014 12:05:50 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Jul-2014 12:05:50 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0101357035en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67092-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 財務管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 101357035zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 102zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 2001年宏碁公司組織改組後營運表現良好，2003年起外資法人大量買入宏碁股票，讓宏碁的股東結構轉變成以外資法人為主體，因此宏碁無法僅靠向國內一般投資人徵求委託書的傳統方式完成股東會。過往在台灣有許多法規面與資訊面上的問題，讓外資法人難以參與股東會及投票表示意見，如此一來對機構投資人持有股份逾半的宏碁便急需要尋找方法確保股東會能夠順利召開。宏碁必須要了解機構投資人買進的目的並建立溝通管道，為外資法人排除投票障礙，以確保公司能正常運作。本研究探討不同類型機構投資人的選股決策和其買進股票後對宏碁的影響，以及宏碁如何管理不同以往的股東結構和建立持續性的溝通機制。藉由股權服務機構ISS(Institutional Shareholder Service)、Broadridge投票平台與The Altman Group的建議，宏碁加強自1998年成立的IR團隊功能，並且提高資訊揭露標準與國際接軌。2005年時成功在機構投資人持股逾半的情況下，全體出席者無異議通過股東會所有議案。2008年台灣開始實施員工分紅費用化後，以發放股票作為員工報酬的成本提高，公司少了一項給予優秀人才報酬的方式，對於人才留任相當不利，發行折價員工認股權憑證議案便在此時空背景下出現。但因此議案牽涉到股權性質的報酬，ISS的態度為採取個案探討，並未在每年度ISS全球地區性的投票綱領中給予方向性的意見。詹浩憑藉著過去3年與ISS合作的經驗與來自The Altman Group的幫助，設計出讓ISS消除疑慮的折價員工認股權憑證架構，並於股東會上連續三年順利通過發行案，可說是台灣企業與機構投資人溝通和管理的典範。zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 摘 要 2
     Abstract 3
     宏碁對機構投資人的經營與管理個案 7
     宏碁對機構投資人的管理與溝通個案分析 48
     一、 研究動機 48
     二、 學習目標 50
     三、 個案問題分析 50
     1. 了解外資法人的選股決策 50
     2. 外資法人參與股東會議事的誘因與可能發生的障礙 55
     3. 外資法人對宏碁可能帶來的影響 67
     4. 了解一般公司如何穩定投資人基礎 70
     四、 結論與後記 75
     5. 附錄一、現行相關制度法規條文 77
     6. 附錄二、2008年ISS對宏碁股東會議案之研究報告 83		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101357035en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 機構投資人zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 投資人關係zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 委託書zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 宏碁zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 股東會zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 股權服務機構zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) institutional investorsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) investor relationshipen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) proxyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Aceren_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) annual general meetingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) proxy service institutionsen_US
dc.title (題名) 宏碁對機構投資人的管理與溝通zh_TW
dc.title (題名) How Acer manages and communicates with institutional shareholders?en_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) TEJ台灣經濟新報
     
     台灣證券交易所
     
     法源法律網
     
     全國法規資料庫
     
     中華民國公開發行公司股務協會，馮震宇等人合著，股東會通訊投票實務作業問題探討，2009年10月
     
     台灣集中保管所稽核室，股東會委託書徵求作業宣導說明會，2011年3月
     
     資誠會計事務所，薛明玲編著，公開發行公司董事會及股東會決議事項，2012年2月
     
     中華公司治理協會編著，股東會電子投票實務手冊，2012年4月
     
     Asia Corporate Governance Association (ACGA) Hong Kong, Charles Lee, Jamie Allen, ACGA White Paper on Corporate Governance in Taiwan, 2011
     
     Brennan, M., and C. Tamarowski. ,2000, Investor Relations, Liquidity, and Stock Prices.Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 12, 26-37.
     
     Bushee, B.J, 1998, the Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior. Vol.73, No. 3, pp. 305-333
     
     Bushee, B.J, and Gregory S. Miller ,2012, Investor Relations, Firm Visibility, and Investor Following. The Accounting Review: May , Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 867-897.
     
     Bushee, B.J., and C.F. Noe.,2000, Corporate Disclosure Practices, Institutional Investors, and Stock Return Volatility. Journal of Accounting Research, 38, 171-202
     
     Chung, K.H;J. Elder; and J. –C. Kim.,2010, Corporate Governance and Liquidity. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45, 265-291
     
     Falkenstein, E. G.,1995, Preferences for Stock Characteristics as Revealed by Mutual Fund Portfolio Holdings. Jounal of Finance, 51,111-135
     
     Gillian,S.L. and Starks, L.T.,2000, Corporate Governance Proposals and Shareholder activism: The Role of Institutional Investors. Journal of Financial Economics, 57, 275-305
     
     Gompers, P.A., and A. Metrick ,2001,. Institutional Investors and Equity Prices, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 229-259
     
     Gompers, P.A.; J.L. Ishii; and A. Metrick.,2003, Corporate governance and Equity Prices, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 107-155
     
     Grinstein, Y., and R. Michaely.,2005, Institutional Holdings and Payout Policy. Journal of Finance, 60,1389-1426
     Harvard Business Review, Focusing capital on the long term., January-February 2014
     
     Harvard Business Review, Institutional investors: The reluctant activists. January-February 1994
     
     Huang, J,2009,. Dynamic Liquidity Preferences of Mutual Funds. Working Paper, Boston College
     
     Hong, H., and M. Huang.,2003, Talking up Liquidity: Insider Trading and Investor Relations. Working Paper, Stanford University.
     
     Jensen C. and Meckling H.,1976, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, October, V. 3, No. 4, pp. 305-360.
     
     Kee H. Chung and Hao Zhang.,2011, Corporate Governance and Institutional Ownership. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46, 247-273
     
     Merton, R.C.,1987, A Simple model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information. Journal of Finance, 42, 483-510
     
     Parrino, R.;R. W. Sias; and L. T. Starks.,2003, Voting with Their Feet: Institutional Ownership Changes around Forced CEO Turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 68, 3-46
     
     Shleifer A. and Robert W. Vishny.,1997, A Survey of Corporate Governance. The Journal of Finance, 52 , pp. 737-783
     
     Tilba A. and McNulty T.,2013, Engaged versus Disengaged Ownership: The Case of Pension Funds in the UK. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21, 165-182
     
     Wolter Kluwer,2012, Commentaries and Cases on the LAW OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATION, Fourth Edition		zh_TW