有鑑於國外私募制度發展成熟，反觀國內實行私募制度，到目前為止僅此短短的六年，相較於公開發行股份之另一種籌資管道，私募制度在國內之金融市場的規模量仍較小，但有日益增加之趨勢。此外，由於過去國內在探討私募方面議題的文獻相當少以及可探討樣本數較小的問題。因此本研究利用106家私募公司之有效大樣本，來分析私募折價發行是否隱含部分資訊，以及在私募宣告效果是否因為投資大眾也樂觀其成公司之私募案件，因此在宣告日之前後三天是否產生正的股價異常報酬。最後，在公司宣告私募後之一年長期績效，是否誠如公司當初所預計達成之績效呢？研究結果顯示：私募比率以及市價淨值比與折價幅度呈現顯著的正相關，意味著資訊不對稱愈嚴重時，相對的投資人也要求更多的折價幅度作為補償。在私募之宣告效果上，由於大部分投資人對於公司未來營收是否會成長，仍使用較近期之判斷資訊，亦即投資人會採用公司最近期之財務報表作為依據。然而，實證結果顯示，國內投資人並未依據最近期之財務報表作為投資依據。最後，在公司宣告私募後之一年長期績效上，發現私募公司之平均營運績效確實有提升之趨勢，因此市場投資人也與以肯定，進而反應在一年後之累積平均異常報酬率具有顯著的正報酬。同時實證結果亦支持，私募宣告後一年之每股盈餘與一年後累積平均異常報酬率呈現顯著正相關。

The development of the private equity system of foreign countries is matured. However in Taiwan, the system had only been in effect for six years. In contrast to the alternative methods of gaining equity, the volume of private equity in the financial market is still small, but with an increasing trend. Moreover, due to the reason that domestic papers discussing private equity and the sampling size used are both limited, therefore this research uses 106 private equity companies as the research sample to analyze whether private placement discounts have hidden information. This research also intends to investigate whether the positive abnormal return prior and after the three days of making the private placement announcement are due to the announcement effect, where the investors are optimistic in the company’s performance. Lastly, This research intends to investigate whether the long-term performance after one year of making the private placement announcement are expected to be accomplished. Regarding to the private placement announcement effect, most investors use short term or recent information to evaluate the company’s future profitability. However, from the empirical evidence of this paper, it is found that domestic investors did not use recent financial statements as the basis of making investment. Lastly, this research found that the averaged long term operating performance after making the private placement announcement has an improving trend, therefore causing the investors to be affirmative in their investment, and it is responded in the positive cumulative average abnormal returns one year after the announcement is made. The empirical evidence of this paper also support that earning per shares (EPS) is positively correlated with the cumulative average abnormal returns after one year of making the private placement announcement.

目錄
第一章	緒論 1
第一節	研究動機 1
第二節	研究目的 3
第二章	文獻探討 6
第三章	私募制度之法律規範 12
第一節	私募制度的形成 12
第二節	私募之定義 12
第三節	私募之主體(發行人資格) 13
第四節	私募之程序 13
第五節	私募之對象及限制(應募人資格) 15
第六節	資訊提供義務 16
第七節	轉售與持有期間之限制 17
第八節	補辦上市、上櫃 19
第四章	研究方法 22
第一節 資料來源及研究變數定義 22
第二節	統計分析方法 32
第五章 實證結果與分析 37
第一節	樣本的敘述統計分析 37
第二節	事件期之平均異常報酬率及累積平均異常報酬率的顯著 性檢定 51
第三節	影響折價幅度之因素分組探討 59
第四節	私募公司之折價幅度、宣告效果以及長期績效之迴歸分析 61
第六章 結論與建議 67
參考文獻 69


表次
表1-1 台灣私募市場發展程度 2
表1-2 現金增資與私募股權之法令規章比較 2
表5-1 私募公司之產業類別分佈表 40
表5-2 私募理由統計表 41
表5-3 私募對象特性及人數統計 42
表5-4 私募公司之基本資料 46
表5-5 私募公司之發行狀況 48
表5-6 距離私募宣告日前後三天之各期平均異常報酬率 51
表5-7距離私募宣告日前後十天之各期平均異常報酬率 54
表5-8 私募宣告日後250天之累積平均異常報酬率顯著性檢定 58
表5-9 影響私募價格折(溢)價幅度之類別分組 59
表5-10 私募價格之折(溢)幅度迴歸分析結果 62
表5-11 私募宣告日前後三天的累積平均異常報酬率迴歸分析；CAR(-3,3) 64
表5-12私募宣告日前後十天的累積平均異常報酬率迴歸分析；CAR(-10,10) 65
表5-13 私募宣告日後一年之累積平均異常報酬率迴歸分析；CAR(0,250) 66

圖次
圖5-1 私募市場之案件分配 38
圖5-2 私募公司之上市上櫃家數分配 38
圖5-3 股東會當日股價 39
圖5-4 CAR(-3,3)趨勢圖 52
圖5-5 距離私募宣告日之單期平均異常報酬率 52
圖5-6 CAR(-10,10)趨勢圖 55
圖5-7 事件期第t期之平均異常報酬率 56
圖5-8 CAR(0,250)趨勢圖 57

中文文獻
1.沈中華、李建然合著，事件研究法，臺北市：華泰，民國89 年。
2.張瑞當、黃怡翔，上市櫃公司私募股權之探討：宣告效果與股價表現(上)，會計研究月刊第258期，2007年5月，頁96-100。
3.張瑞當、黃怡翔，上市櫃公司私募股權之探討：宣告效果與股價表現(下)，會計研究月刊第259期，2007年6月，頁122-127。
4.葉淑玲，私募股權市場投資與對市場之影響-以全球市場發展及日本政府之因應為探討重心，證券暨期貨月刊第25卷第6期，2007年6月，頁39-61。
5.陳香吟，私募有價證券之施行情形及未來修正方向，證券暨期貨月刊第23卷第10期，2005年10月，頁19-25。
6.李啟賢，證券交易法下之私募有價證券制度簡介，集保月刊第120期，2003年11月，頁3-11。
7.黃正一，我國證券私募制度探討(上)，法令月刊第53卷第9期，2002年9月，頁37-53。
8.黃正一，我國證券私募制度探討(下)，法令月刊第53卷第10期，2002年10月，頁46-57。
9.劉連煜，我國證券私募制度解析，實用月刊第327期，2002年3月，頁75-80。

英文文獻
1.Asquith, p. and D.W. Mullins, Jr., 1986, “Equity issues and stock price dilution”, Journal of Financial Economics, 15, 61-89.
2.Barclay, M. J.,C.G. Holderness and D. P. Sheehan, 2007,“Private Placements
and Managerial Entrenchment”, Journal of Corporate Finance,13,4,461-484.
3.Barclay, M. J. and C. G. Holderness, 1989, “Private Benefits from Control of
Public Corporation”, Journal of Financial Economics, 25, 271-395.
4.Brounen, Dirk and Eichholtz, Piet. 2002,“Initial Public Offerings –Evidence from The British, French and Swedish Property Share Markets.” Real Estate Finance and Economics, 22,4.
5.Clas Bergstrom, Daniel Nilsson, Marcus Wahlberg,2006, ” Underpricing and Long-Run Performance Patterns of European Private-Equity-Backed and Non-Private-Equity-Backed IPOs”, The Journal of Private Equity, 9, 4, 16-47.
6.Dann, L.Y. and W.H. Mikkelson, 1984, “Convertible debt issuance, capital structure change and financing-related information: Some new evidence”, Journal of Financial Economics, 13,157-186.
7.Hertzel, Michael, and Richard L. Smith, 1993, “Market discounts and shareholder gains for placing equity privately”, Journal of Finance 48, 459-485.
8.Hertzel, M., Lemmon, M., Linck, J.S., Rees, L., 2002,” Long-run performance following private placements of equity”, Journal of Finance ,57, 2595–2617.
9.Ibbotson, Roger G., 1975, “Price Performance of Common Stock New Issues”, Journal of Financial Economics, 2, 3, 235-272. 
10.Jensen, M. C., and W. H. Meckling, 1976, “Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and capital structure”, Journal of Financial Economics ,3, 305-360.
11.Korwar, A.N., 1982, “The effect of new issues of equity: An empirical investigation”, Unpublished manuscript.
12.Krishnamurthy, S., Spindt, P., Subramaniam, V., Woidtke, T., 2005, “Does investor identity matter in equity issues?Evidence form private placements”, Journal of Financial Intermediation ,14, 210–238.
13.Loughran, Tim, and Jay R. Ritter, 1995, “The new issues puzzle”, Journal of Finance, 50, 23-51.
14.Ljungqvist, Alexander P., 1996, “Pricing of Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from Germany”, European Economic Review, 41, 1309-1320.
15.Masulis, Ronald W., and Ashok N. Korwar, 1986, “Seasoned equity offerings: An empirical investigation”, Journal of Financial Economics ,15, 91-118.
16.Mikkelson, Wayne, and Megan Partch, 1986, “Valuation effects of security offerings and the issuance process”, Journal of Financial Economics, 15, 31-60.
17.Mikkelson, W.H., Regassa, H., 1991, “ Premiums paid in block transactions”, Managerial and Decision Economics, 12, 511–517.
18.Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny, 1988, “Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis”, Journal of'Financia1 Economics ,20, 293-315.
19.Myers, S.C., Majluf, N., 1984, “ Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have” Journal of Financial Economics, 13, 187–221.
20.Ritter, Jay R., 1991, “The long-run performance of initial public offerings”, Journal of Finance ,46, 3-27.
21.Sheehan, D.P., Swisher, J., 1998. “How Sophisticated are〝Sophisticated Investors?〞” Unpublished Working Paper. Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.
22.Silber, William L., 1991, “Discounts on Restricted Stock: The Impact of Illiquidity on Stock Prices”, Financial Analysts Journal, 47, 60–64.
23.Spiess, D. Katherine, and John Affleck-Graves, 1995, “Underperformance in long-run stock returns following seasoned equity offerings”, Journal of Financial Economics , 38, 243-267.
24.Wruck, K.H., 1989, “ Equity ownership concentration and firm value: evidence from private equity financings”. Journal of Financial Economics ,23, 3–27.