scholarly journals Equity crowdfunding: Determinants of company’s success on a crowdfunding platform

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-164
Author(s):  
Irina V. Berezinets ◽  
◽  
Yulia B. Ilina ◽  
Nadezhda A. Klyarovskaya ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Study ◽  
Equity Capital ◽  
Innovative Activity ◽  
Equity Crowdfunding ◽  
Financing Mechanism ◽  
Equity Investments ◽  
Industry Diversification ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
A Share

Equity crowdfunding, a form of company financing through equity investments, has become increasingly relevant in recent years. This paper analyzes the advantages of this financing mechanism, the motives of issuers and investors — participants of the crowdinvesting process. Most participants of investing are non-professional investors, for whom recommendations for choosing companies on the platform based on the determinants of investment attractiveness are of practical value. The authors conducted an empirical study to establish the relationship between investment attractiveness and the characteristics of issuing companies emerging on the crowdfunding platforms. The study sample includes 299 companies that raised equity capital on one of the leading platforms in the UK, Crowdcube, between 2011 and 2020. The results of the study showed that the investment attractiveness of companies is higher if during placement they offer a larger share proportion of non-voting than voting shares during the placement. Companies in which managers own a share in capital, firms with registered patents as an indicator of their innovative activity, and companies that do not demonstrate industry diversification have a higher attractiveness for investors. This research contributes to the existing studies of determinants of the success of equity crowdfunding, provides recommendations to investors on the choice of companies with particular characteristics that determine the investment attractiveness of issuers on crowdfunding platforms.

Thromboplastin Related Differences in the Determination of International Normalised Ratio: A Cause for Concern?

1994 ◽  
Vol 72 (03) ◽  
pp. 426-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Kitchen ◽  
I D Walker ◽  
T A L Woods ◽  
F E Preston
Keyword(s):  
Patient Management ◽  
External Quality Assessment ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Warfarin Dosage ◽  
External Quality ◽  
External Quality Assessment Scheme ◽  
International Normalised Ratio ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

SummaryWhen the International Normalised Ratio (INR) is used for control of oral anticoagulant therapy the same result should be obtained irrespective of the laboratory reagent used. However, in the UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme (NEQAS) for Blood Coagulation INRs determined using different reagents have been significantly different.For 18 NEQAS samples Manchester Reagent (MR) was associated with significantly lower INRs than those obtained using Diagen Activated (DA, p = 0.0004) or Instrumentation Laboratory PT-Fib HS (IL, p = 0.0001). Mean INRs for this group were 3.15, 3.61, and 3.65 for MR, DA, and IL respectively. For 61 fresh samples from warfarin-ised patients with INRs of greater than 3.0 the relationship between thromboplastins in respect of INR was similar to that observed for NEQAS data. Thus INRs obtained with MR were significantly lower than with DA or IL (p <0.0001). Mean INRs for this group were 4.01, 4.40, and 4.59 for MR, DA, and IL respectively.We conclude that the differences between INRs measured with the thromboplastins studied here are sufficiently great to influence patient management through warfarin dosage schedules, particularly in the upper therapeutic range of INR. There is clearly a need to address the issues responsible for the observed discrepancies.

Researching (with) Major Food Retailers

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Evans
Keyword(s):  
Food Systems ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Major Food ◽  
Food Retailers ◽  
Food Retailer ◽  
The One ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Opening Up

This paper considers the relationship between social science and the food industry, and it suggests that collaboration can be intellectually productive and morally rewarding. It explores the middle ground that exists between paid consultancy models of collaboration on the one hand and a principled stance of nonengagement on the other. Drawing on recent experiences of researching with a major food retailer in the UK, I discuss the ways in which collaborating with retailers can open up opportunities for accessing data that might not otherwise be available to social scientists. Additionally, I put forward the argument that researchers with an interest in the sustainability—ecological or otherwise—of food systems, especially those of a critical persuasion, ought to be empirically engaging with food businesses. I suggest that this is important in terms of generating better understandings of the objectionable arrangements that they seek to critique, and in terms of opening up conduits through which to affect positive changes. Cutting across these points is the claim that while resistance to commercial engagement might be misguided, it is nevertheless important to acknowledge the power-geometries of collaboration and to find ways of leveling and/or leveraging them. To conclude, I suggest that universities have an important institutional role to play in defining the terms of engagement as well as maintaining the boundaries between scholarship and consultancy—a line that can otherwise become quite fuzzy when the worlds of commerce and academic research collide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document