（節(jié)選）外文翻譯---高成長型企業(yè)在選擇融資方式時對優(yōu)序融資理論和負債能力的考慮

1、3400 單詞， 單詞，19300 英文字符， 英文字符，5970 漢字 漢字出處： 出處：Vanacker T R, Manigart S. “Pecking Order and Debt Capacity Considerations for High-Growth Companies Seeking Financing[J]. Small Business Economics, 2010, 35(1):53-69.原文 Pecki

2、ng order and debt capacity considerations for high-growth companies seeking financingTR Vanacker，S ManigartAbstract :This paper examines incremental financing decisions within high-growth businesses. A large longitudinal

3、 dataset, free of survivorship bias, to cover financing events of high-growth businesses for up to 8 years is analyzed. The empirical evidence shows that profitable businesses prefer to finance investments with retained

4、 earnings, even if they have unused debt capacity. External equity is particularly important for unprofitable businesses with high debt levels, limited cash flows, high risk of failure or significant investments in intan

5、gible assets. These findings are consistent with the extended pecking order theory controlling for constraints imposed by debt capacity. It suggests that new equity issues are particularly important to allow high-growt

6、h businesses to grow beyond their debt capacity.Keywords ：Financing decisions. Pecking order theory . Debt capacity. Growth1 IntroductionAlthough few in number, high-growth businesses contribute disproportionately to emp

7、loyment and wealth creation in an economy (Storey 1994). This makes organizational growth a central area of research in entrepreneurship and a major policy concern. Proper financial management, including raising suitabl

8、e financing, is one of the key factors shaping high-growth companies (Nicholls-Nixon 2005). The purpose of this paper is to offer an insight into the discrete financing decisions taken within high-growth businesses. In

9、formation asymmetries are thought to be particularly severe in this setting (Frank and Goyal 2003), causing a substantial wedge between the costs of internal and external (debt and equity) financing (Carpenter and Pete

10、rsen 2002a). We therefore focus on the pecking order theory to explain the financing choices of high-growth companies. The pecking order theory predicts the existence of a financing hierarchy, where business managers av

11、oid the cost of external financing if possible. As a result, they will first prefer to use internal funds, then debt and finally outside equity as a last resort to finance investments (Myers 1984; Myers and Majluf 1984

12、). The impact of company characteristics on financial decision-making may vary according to the research setting (Harris and Raviv 1991). It is therefore important to test financial theories in settings where our knowl

13、edge is limited to determine the generalizability of the theories across different settings. (Cassar 2004). Although and Miller 1963; Titman 1984; Myers 1977). The static trade-off theory predicts companies will make inc

14、remental financing decisions in such a way that an optimal capital structure is obtained. This optimal capital structure is obtained when the marginal benefit of an additional dollar amount of debt financing equals its

15、 marginal cost. Following the static trade-off theory, we would expect companies with a lot of internal funds to rebalance their capital structure and issue additional outside debt financing. First, businesses with plen

16、ty of internal funds or financial slack are less likely to fail, reducing the bankruptcy costs associated with debt financing. Further, additional outside debt financing may mitigate potential agency conflicts resulting

17、 from abundant internal funds (Jensen 1986). Hence, the static trade-off theory indicates that internal financing and outside debt financing are complements rather than substitutes. Profitable businesses that built up i

18、nternal equity capital in the past are predicted to be particularly likely to attract additional debt financing in the future. When internal funds are insufficient to finance the growth of the business, the question wh

19、ether to raise additional debt or new equity becomes critical. Bank financing is an important source of financing for young and growing businesses in Continental Europe and is expected to be widely available (Manigart an

20、d Meuleman2004). Bank debt is considered to be the cheapest source of outside financing, as banks only require an interest on their loan and do not expect to share in the value creation, as equity investors do. Banks on

21、ly have a limited return on their investment (i.e., interest margin) and as a result are expected to focus primarily on low-risk projects in businesses with sufficient cash flow to fulfill the fixed debt- related payment

22、s (Carey et al. 1998). Furthermore, banks typically require collateral and may include restrictive debt covenants in the debt contract to reduce adverse selection and moral hazard problems (Berger and Udell 1998). Howev

23、er, as leverage increases, the probability of financial distress and moral hazard problems increase, and hence the marginal cost of debt financing may increase rapidly (Carpenter and Petersen 2002b ).At a certain point t

24、he cost of additional debt may be excessively high or debt financing may simply be unavailable, and business owners may turn to new equity as a last resort. Contrary to additional financial debt, new equity issues do n

25、ot increase the probability of failure, do not accentuate moral hazard problems and do not require collateral (Carpenter and Petersen 2002b ). However, the cost of issuing new equity is thought to be significant, espec

26、ially for small and unquoted businesses. Venture capital investors, for example, require an average yearly return of more than 20% for later stage investments and as much as 55% for early stage investments (Sapienza et

27、al. 1996). A higher expected return lowers company value and in turn increases the equity stake required by the outside investor.A particularly important problem for the traditional pecking order theory, however, is ex

28、actly the wide use of outside equity financing despite its high cost (Fama and French 2005; Frank and Goyal 2005). Significant external equity issues by high-growth companies are considered to refute the pecking order t