The end (of rights issues) is near

In the latest Clawback, columnist Philippe Espinasse puts the Hong Kong Stock Exchange’s (HKEX) recent consultation paper on capital raisings by listed issuers under the microscope.

  • By GlobalCapital
  • 26 Sep 2017
Email a colleague
Request a PDF

The reason why HKEX now proposes to introduce changes to the way some primary equity offerings are conducted is, it says, “to address recent concerns about certain share issuance transactions that might not afford a fair treatment of shareholders, or an orderly market for securities trading”.

Putting aside the fact that some of these concerns have in fact been raised for many years by governance warriors such as David Webb, this sounds in theory like a laudable idea. Some of what has been tabled by the exchange, however, may well end up having the exact opposite effect.

HKEX seeks to “address potential abuses related to large scale, deeply discounted capital raising activities”. To this end, it has proposed “disallowing rights issues, open offers, and specific mandate placings conducted within a one-year period that would result in a cumulative material value dilution (provisionally 25% or more), unless there are exceptional circumstances, for example when an issuer is in financial difficulty". 

The latter exemption is actually pretty similar to that applicable to the maximum discount allowed for a capital raising exercise under a general mandate (that is, 20%).

While the dilution in rights issues is indeed normally higher than in other forms of capital raisings, rights issues actually do not of course result in any dilution for those existing shareholders who choose to participate in the capital raising.

Obviously, this is because they can exercise their rights and purchase shares to maintain their level of ownership. In addition, shareholders who conversely decide not to participate in the rights issue (and will therefore necessarily incur dilution) can sell rights to offset the value of the dilution created by the issue of shares at a discount by the company.

And because rights not taken up by shareholders lapse and are automatically sold in a controlled manner by way of a “rump “ placement on the last day of the rights issue, this also helps to diversify the shareholder base and improve liquidity.

In this regard, a positive development is that HKEX has at long last proposed to “require issuers to adopt either excess application arrangements or compensatory arrangements for the disposal of unsubscribed shares in rights issues or open offers” — both of which are currently optional.

This would finally mirror international best practice, and protect inactive entitlement holders through the sale of unsubscribed shares in the market if a premium above the rights issue price can be obtained (with the proceeds remitted to such holders) — something which has long been a hobby horse of securities activists in the city.

While they have indeed led to abuses (although chiefly on the part of illiquid small and micro caps), deep discounted (but not other) rights issues are also often conducted as a last resort, to raise emergency capital. This was evident from the flurry of rights issues conducted by financial institutions at the time of the subprime crisis, so it is likely that a number of these would in any event fall under the “exceptional circumstances” exemption clause allowed under HKEX’s proposed ban on deeply discounted activities.

Further, removing the mandatory underwriting requirement for all rights issues (and open offers), as proposed by HKEX, could well sound their death knell as capital raising options in Hong Kong.

No doubt, investment banks will appreciate the exchange’s suggestion. No bookrunner readily seeks to underwite securities if it can be avoided, unless there is already significant back-up from investors, such as in a soft or settlement underwriting.

But at the very least, rights issues as they currently stand offer an all-important certainty of proceeds to issuers, which is generally not the case for placements or similar offerings.

Given the additional cumbersome requirement to publish a prospectus (which is, again, not necessary for other forms of primary offerings), the much longer period of market exposure (21 days), and the added complication that rights issues generally exclude international retail investors to prevent public offerings being registered and conducted across jurisdictions, rights issues could now fast disappear altogether from the city’s financial markets.

In such a case, they would likely systematically be replaced by more straightforward placements, which are often conducted in Hong Kong under general mandates, many of which are routinely rolled over or refreshed from one year to the other.

I note that HKEX has proposed requiring minority shareholders' approval for open offers (in which rights are, unlike in rights issues, non-renouceable) only, unless the new shares are to be issued under the authority of an existing general mandate (which only needs to be approved by an ordinary resolution of the shareholders).

With the majority of capital raisings by Hong Kong-listed companies likely already conducted pursuant to general mandates, it’s hard to see how some of HKEX’s proposals will ultimately improve fair treatment of shareholders. Instead, they may well unwittingly reinforce the already considerable powers of majority stakeholders.


Philippe Espinasse was a capital markets banker for almost 20 years and is now an independent consultant in Hong Kong. He is the author of “IPO: A Global Guide”, “IPO Banks: Pitch, Selection and Mandate”, and of the Hong Kong thrillers “Hard Underwriting” and “The Traveler”. His new book, “Cornerstone Investors: A practice Guide for Asian IPOs” will be published in early 2018.

  • By GlobalCapital
  • 26 Sep 2017

Panda Bonds Top Arrangers

Rank Arranger Share % by Volume
1 Bank of China (BOC) 28.62
2 CITIC Securities 21.06
3 China CITIC Bank Corp 9.72
4 China Merchants Bank Co 9.18
5 Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) 7.56

Bookrunners of Asia-Pac (ex-Japan) ECM

Rank Lead Manager Amount $m No of issues Share %
  • Last updated
  • Today
1 Goldman Sachs 2,041.17 5 15.43%
2 Huatai Securities Co Ltd 1,006.47 5 7.61%
3 Morgan Stanley 816.96 5 6.18%
4 Citi 773.86 5 5.85%
5 China Merchants Securities Co Ltd 684.68 6 5.18%

Bookrunners of Asia Pacific (ex-Japan) G3 DCM

Rank Lead Manager Amount $m No of issues Share %
  • Last updated
  • Today
1 Goldman Sachs 3,253.25 9 4.09%
2 Citi 2,657.81 16 3.34%
3 JPMorgan 2,627.80 6 3.30%
4 HSBC 2,497.09 21 3.14%
5 Morgan Stanley 2,299.31 10 2.89%

Asian polls & awards

  • Regional Capital Markets Awards Part IV: Investment Bank

    In the last instalment of our 2017 awards, we present the full write-ups of the winners of Best Asian Investment Bank and Best Investment Bank.

  • Regional Capital Markets Awards Part III: Bonds

    In the third instalment of our 2017 awards, we present the full write-ups of the winners of the Best Local Currency Bond, Best High Yield Bond, Best Financial Bond, Best SSA Bond, Best Investment Grade Bond, Best Project Finance Deal, Best Bond, Best G3 and Local Currency Bond House, and Best High Yield Bond House.

  • Regional Capital Markets Awards Part II: Equities

    In the second instalment of our 2017 awards, we present the full write-ups of the winners for Best Follow-On/Accelerated Bookbuild, Best Equity-Linked Deal, Best IPO, Best ECM Deal and Best ECM House.

  • Regional Capital Markets Awards Part I: Loans

    In the first instalment of our 2017 awards, we present the full write-ups of the winners for Best Investment Grade Syndicated Loan, Best High Yield Syndicated Loan, Best Leveraged/Acquisition Finance, Best Loan and Best Loans House.

  • GlobalCapital Asia regional capital markets awards 2017: the winners

    Over the last two months, GlobalCapital Asia's team has conducted pitch meetings with banks to decide the most impressive capital markets transactions and advisers in Asia in 2017.