SEEU Review vol. 5 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fitim Deari, MBA and Media Deari claim that size doesn’t have significant role for deciding the capital structure decisions. It is conversely for Slovenian listed companies. Growth is positively associated with leverage for both, Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies. It is not significant at Macedonian listed companies and tested hypothesis cannot be confirmed. For Slovenian listed companies, growth is significant and tested hypothesis cannot be confirmed. Non-debt tax shield is negatively associated with leverage for Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies. Non-debt tax shield is found insignificant for Macedonian and significant for Slovenian listed companies. Thus, are verified tested hypothesis for Macedonian, but not for Slovenian listed companies. Concluding remarks This study sought to analyze some determinants of the capital structure decisions of some Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies in light of the Static-trade off theory, Pecking order theory, and Agency cost theory. We have selected five independent variables with purpose to see their effect on capital structure. The analysis was conducted based on panel of data obtained from the published annual reports for the period 2005-2007. The results are consistent with implications first of all of Pecking order theory and then of Static-trade off theory. Agency cost theory was not confirmed in our results, except size variable for both, Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies; and just tangibility for Slovenian listed companies. It seems that poorness of financial market and absence of bondholders in Macedonia are reflected in our study. Thus, they don’t prefer to issue bonds to borrow money. Macedonian listed companies prefer internal funds more than external funds. This explain that Macedonian listed companies prefer and have access to equity financing once they go public as most companies enjoy a favorable high stock price. Another possible explanation is the fact that the Macedonian financial market is still in an infant stage of development. Profitability was confirmed relevant determinant for Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies. Creditors seem to be very careful in line of companies’ profitability. More profitable listed companies would tend to 86
<strong>SEEU</strong> <strong>Review</strong> Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 have fewer debts. On the other hand, banks are the major or event the only source of companies’ external debt, and trade credit is very important source for unlisted companies. On average, Macedonian listed companies were confirmed to use fewer debts than Slovenian listed companies. Tangibility, size, non-debt tax shield, and growth were confirmed not to have effect in capital structures decisions for Macedonian listed companies, and just growth was confirmed not to have effect in capital structures decisions for Slovenian listed companies. Finally, we can conclude that Macedonian listed companies have to rely on equity financing rather than debt financing. In order to provide more financing opportunities for Macedonian companies, it is desirable for Macedonia to accelerate the development of its financial markets. For future studies it might be interesting to focus on following aspects: Company age and industrial feature should be included as new variables, Extension of the data series and macro economic factors should be included, and Differentiating between long term and short term debt. 87
Page 1 and 2:
UNIVERSITETI I EVROPËS JUGLINDORE
Page 3:
Contents Foreword by the Editor in
Page 6:
UEJL për këshillat e tij në koh
Page 9 and 10:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 J
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 f
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 c
Page 19 and 20:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 j
Page 21 and 22:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 T
Page 23 and 24:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 a
Page 25 and 26:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 1
Page 27 and 28:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 c
Page 29 and 30:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 t
Page 31 and 32:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 e
Page 33 and 34:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 R
Page 35 and 36: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 T
Page 37 and 38: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 n
Page 39 and 40: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 a
Page 41 and 42: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 A
Page 43 and 44: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 w
Page 47 and 48: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 i
Page 49 and 50: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 M
Page 51 and 52: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 G
Page 53 and 54: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009
Page 55 and 56: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 L
Page 57 and 58: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 m
Page 61 and 62: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 t
Page 63 and 64: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 o
Page 65 and 66: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 g
Page 67 and 68: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 1
Page 69 and 70: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 A
Page 77 and 78: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 H
Page 83 and 84: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 S
Page 85: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 T
Page 91 and 92: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 H
Page 93 and 94: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 s
Page 97 and 98: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 m
Page 101 and 102: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 P
Page 103 and 104: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 I
Page 105 and 106: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 e
Page 109 and 110: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 C
Page 113 and 114: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 D
Page 115 and 116: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 g
Page 121 and 122: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 d
Page 123 and 124: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 R
Page 125 and 126: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 S
Page 129 and 130: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 W
Page 131 and 132: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 M
Page 133 and 134: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 I
Page 138 and 139:
138 Reviewers: Benjamin Keatinge Dr
Page 140 and 141:
Iranda Bajrami, MA kanë qenë të
Page 142 and 143:
Iranda Bajrami, MA a state of c
Page 144 and 145:
Iranda Bajrami, MA to read and use
Page 146 and 147:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Classrooms were
Page 148 and 149:
Iranda Bajrami, MA the characterist
Page 150 and 151:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Not all the t
Page 152 and 153:
Iranda Bajrami, MA reinforce studen
Page 154 and 155:
Iranda Bajrami, MA References 1. Am
Page 156 and 157:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix A Facto
Page 158 and 159:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix B Obser
Page 160 and 161:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 22. Classroom en
Page 162 and 163:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix C Stude
Page 164 and 165:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 9. 10. 11. 12. 1
Page 166 and 167:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix D Teach
Page 168 and 169:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 18. 19. 20. 21.
Page 170 and 171:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Consistent with
Page 172 and 173:
172 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Kadri Sule
Page 174 and 175:
Mentor Hamiti, Visar Shehu and Agni
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
194 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Robert Sch
Page 196 and 197:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gezim Xhaferi and
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
212 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Selim Jusu
Page 214 and 215:
Fatmir Faiku, Haxhere Faiku, Murtez
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
show all

SEEU Review vol. 5 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?