competitive impact of foreign banks_the case of ukraine

8/3/2019 Competitive Impact of Foreign Banks_The Case of Ukraine

1/11

122

ISSN 1392-1258.EKoNoMIKa200986

COMpETiTivE iMpaCT Of fOrEigN baNKSON fiNaNCial MarKETS iN TraNSiTiONalECONOMiES: ThE CaSE Of UKraiNE

voodymy Secenko

Ph. D. Assoc. Professor,

Chair of International Economics, Economic Faculty

National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Ukraine

Room 602, 90-a, Vasylkyvska Str.

02032 Kyiv, UkraneE-mail: [email protected]

Abstract.The scale, the major economic indicators and the competitive impact o oreign banks onthe national banking system o a transitional economy, based on the case o Ukraine, are studied.

The banking sector development o the transitional economies diers rom that o developedcountries. Transitional economies have the bank-centered nancial systems with the prevailingbanking sector, a rapidly growing demand or banking services, booming credit supply, weak ins-titutional and regulatory policies causing problems with banking stability. The intensive entry ooreign banks and their increasing market share have a signicant impact on banking competitionand perormance.

The paper argues that the oreign banks entry by the acquisition o Ukrainian banks shares iscompetitive by nature (demand-side competition and supply-side competition on the entry stageand post-entry market competition). The entry competition infuences the relatively high price in-dicators o the Ukrainian banks shares in comparison with neighbouring countries. The post-entrycompetitive position o oreign banks is based on utilizing their competitive advantages and thepost-entry market strategy. The oreign banks utilize capabilities to increase capitalization, assetsand liabilities management and gaining a substantial market position, and oer more competitiveproducts and services in all major market segments.

Keywords: transitional economies, banking sector, oreign banks, bank share price, banking

competition.

Introduction

Theinternationalizationofbankingservices

is ne f he mj ends in he glbl

economy.Ithasadifferentextentandim -

plicationsinthedeveloped,emergingand

transitionaleconomies.Theforeignbanks

eny is ne f he cmmn fees f he

nancialsystemsstructuralchangesin

nsitionaleconomies.Theintensity,time

frame,mode,extentandimplicationsofthe

feign bnks eny in ninl mkes

vary depending of themacroeconomic,

monetary,demand,institutional,regulatory

nd he cndiins in diffeen nsiinl

economies.

Sdies f he bnking sec develp-

men in nsiinl ecnmies cncene


2/11

123

msly n he bnking sysem insiinl

reforms,creditboomandbankingstability,

feignbanksentryandtheirmarketshare,

institutionalandregulatoryissues.

the im f he esech is sdyhe feign bnks eny cmpeiin nd

ps-eny implicins f he cmpeiive

envinmen in he ninl bnking sysem

ofatransitionaleconomy,basedonthecase

ofUkraine.

Theresearchobjectivesare:

veview esech ppches

bnking cmpeiin nd is inen-tionaldimension;

idenify he key ecnmic indics

f he feign bnk eny in nsiinl

economy;

sdy he cmpeiin specs he

sges f feign bnk eny in nsi-

tionalmarkets;

evle he mj cmpeiive im-

pcs f feign bnks eny n n-

sitionaleconomybankingmarket.

Methods

Cmpeiin in he bnking sec is sd-

ied by sing diffeen esech mehds

andmodels.Themostcommonlyutilized

researchmethodsare:

mesing he degee f bnking cn-

centrationusingtheHerndahlHirsh -

manindexorothermethodsandbased

n h ssess hw highe degee f

cncenin pses me inensive

competition, inuencing the banking

behvi nd hgh h he bnks

performance;

evaluationofperfectcompetition,mo-

nply nd impefec cmpeiin md-

els f bnking (fe Mhews nd

thmpson,2005);

sdying he scle nd scpe f ecnmy

asacomplexsourceofthebankscom-

peiive dvnges nd heefe meeffectiveperformance(afterHeffernan,

2004);

modelingX-efciencyasbankmanage-

mentabilitytocontrolcost(costX-ef-

ciency)orprot(protX-efciency)

in espnse cmpeiin chllenges

(afterHeffernan,2004);

pplicin f diffeen pefmnce s-

sessmen mehds evle he degee

ofcompetitionimpact,includingtheef-

ciencyofassetsandliabilities,deposit

loans margin, costprot ratios,perfor-

mancecomparativeindicators,rating

models,forexample,CAMELS,etc;

sdying cmpeiin s diving fce

ofbankingandnancialinnovationsand

spilloverandmarketeffects.Ecnmic indics nd he impc f

he feign bnks eny n nsiinl

mkes e sdied sing he scl

cmpive nlysis f he eny nd

thepost-entrycompetition,itseconomic

measuring.Theforeignbankentrycauses

scl chnges wihin he ninl bnk-

ingsectorandthroughthatinuencesthecompetition,asarguedbyClaessensand

Laeven(Claessens,Laeven,2003,2006).

Sch scl ppch cld be devel-

opedascomparativeandtime-fashioned,

specifying diffeen dimensins f eny

andpost-entrycompetition,economicindi-

cs nd hei impc n diffeen sges

f feign bnks behvi in nsiinl

markets. Supplyand demand conditions

f ukinin bnks shes he feign


3/11

124

bnks en trystage,therelativemarketpow -

ershouldalsobetakenintoconsideration.

the cse f ukine s middle-incme nd

mid-sizetransitionaleconomyisusedinthe

studyincomparisonwiththeexperienceofneighboringcountries.

Feign bnks in ukinin nsiinl

economy:entryconditionsandcompetitive

impact.

Cross-borderbanksmergersandacqui -

sitions(M&A)areawayoftheforeign

investments,capitalconsolidationaswell

s insiins nd mkes ineninl-

ization.Cross-borderM&Aaccountfora

sbsnil p f he ineninl cpil

owsandfeatureasanimportantdirec-

tion oftheEuropeanandglobalnancial

integration.

the d f e e bnk css-bde

M&Ashowthattheoverallandmedium

valuesof dealsare increasing, indicating

consolidationofthenancialservicessec-tor.Atthesametime,foreigninvestments

ply diffeen le in he bnking secs

f he Eu-15 cnies nd Eu new mem-

berstates(NMS).Foreignentitiesaccount

inNMSfor70.3%oftotalbankingassets,

whileintheEU-15countriessuchgureis

27.8%[ECB2008b,p.11].

NMS nd nsiinl ecnmies e

me pecepive f feign invesmens

intothebankingsector,primarilyduetoits

ndedevelpmen in cmpisn wih he

EU-15countriesandtheexcessivedemand

fornancewhichcouldnotbecoveredby

domesticsources.Atthesametime,the

feign bnks eny is mived pimilyby he gwh penil f ms lcive

sevices sch s cnsmes nd mgge

loans,whichdrivesimportincreaseanda

negativeimpactontheBOPcurrentaccount

andexchangerates.

Finncil sysems f nsiinl ecn-

mies e bnk-ceneed wih cmpively

wek sck mkes nd cmpively less

developednon-bankingnancialinstitu-

tions.InUkraine,theshareofbanksassets

inconsolidatedassetsofthenancialsys -

temgrewupfrom86.1%in2005to92.1%

in2007(ourcalculationbasedonofcial

banking and nancial statistics). Such a

lge nd gwing she f bnks cld be

consideredasaspecicstructuralasym-

metryofthetransitionalnancialsystem.Non-banking nancial institutionsplay a

limied le in he mke cmpeiin de

hei lw swiching cpciy nd limied

civeness f he finncil sevices

customers. Therefore, the bankingsector

competitivenessandefciencyplayakey

le in he vell pefmnce nd sbiliy

ofthenancialsystem.

Feign bnks eny in he ukinin

mke kes plce in cmpeiive en-

Table 1. Bank M&A in the euro area

20002004 20052008

Vle f dels (E billins) 182 269

Nmbe f dels 485 274

Note:Dealsinvolved10%sharecapitalandmore;for2008dataforthersthalfoftheyear.

Source: Cross-borderbankmergers&acquisitionsandinternationalinvestors.ECBMonthlyBulletin.

October2008.P.71.


4/11

125

vinmen de he spply nd demnd

conditionsandinformationasymmetry.

Supplyanddemandconditions,information

asymmetryandalower,incomparisonwith

maturemarkets,levelofmarketcompeti-

tioninuenceforeignbanksmotivation

forentry.

the demnd f he bnk shes is

diven by he feign bnks esimin f

he mke penil nd heefe by spe-

cicrequirementstothetargetedUkrainian

banks.Thedemand-sidecompetitionforthe

scks f he ukinin bnks hs been p-

idly incesing since 2004 de he gwh

penil f he dynmic mke high

gwh penil f ecnmic nd bnkingservices,amoderatebankingcompetition

nd elively lwe cs f invesmens

forthemarketsharedevelopment.

the mj fcs f cmpeiive demnd

f ukinin bnks shes e he vl-

tion,monetary,macroeconomic,structural

andmarketfactors:

) he emining ndevlin f sses

intheUkrainianeconomy,including

bankingassets,determinesthepotential

f heifairmarketvaluationuponnan-

cialmarketsliberalizationandtherefore

gining mginl incme fm he

increasevalueofassets.Mid-termpros-

pecs f incesing is mke vlin

areduetoUkrainesjoiningtheWTO,

establishingafreetradezonewiththe

EUandnancialmarketliberalization;

b) he ecnmic gwh penil in

Ukraineremainsquitehigh.Itsmacro-

ecnmic develpmens demnse

balancedandstableeconomicgrowth,a

goodadjustmentcapacitytotheexternal

shocks,moderatecurrencystability,

butarelativelyhighinationasfora

transitionaleconomy.

Highratesofeconomicgrowth,capital

invesmens nd cnsmpin cse gw-

ing demnd f bnking sevices cm-

mercial,corporate,investmentandprivate.

Growingincomesfeedconsumerspending,

depsis nd cnsmes bwing cp-

city.Itbecomesamajorcumulativedemand

fc f bnking sevices nd ne f he

keymotivesfortheforeignbanksentry;

Table 2. Ukraine: major macroeconomic indicators, 20012008

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008f

GDPnominalprices,US$Bln. 38.0 42.4 50.2 64.9 86.2 106.5 140.5 171.0

RealGDPgrowthrates,% 9.2 5.2 9.6 12.1 2.7 7.3 7.3 6.5

NominalGDPpercapita,US$ 781 878 1,049 1,367 1,830 2,278 3,027 3,695Indsil pdcin el gwh,% 14.2 7.0 15.8 12.5 3.1 6.2 10.2 8.5

Cpil invesmens el gwh,% 6.0 3.4 22.5 20.5 3.9 18.7 21.9 18.0

Consumptionrealgrowth,% 9.3 5.0 10.0 9.7 15.7 11.9 14.0 10.0

NetFDIinow,US$Bln. 0.8 0.7 1.4 1.7 7.5 5.7 8.2 9.5

CPIannualchange,% 6.1 -0.6 8.2 12.3 10.3 11.6 16.6 14.0

BOPcurrentaccount,%GDP 3.7 7.5 5.8 10.7 2.9 -1.5 -3.3 -4.5

Ofcialreserves,US$Bln. 3.3 4.4 6.9 9.7 19.4 22.4 32.2 37.5

Exchangerate,UAH/US$ 5.37 5.33 5.33 5.32 5.12 5.05 5.05 5.05

S o u r c e s :MinistryofStatisticsofUkraine.2008Fmedianofdifferentforecasts.


5/11

126

c) he gwh penil f bnking sevices

isquitehighintheirscopeandfuture

value.ThebankingsectorinUkraine

since2002demonstratesextremelyhigh

es f gwh de he pid mnei-zationofeconomyandhigheconomic

growth.Boththesupplyanddemandof

mney emins cive f feign in-

vestors.Theaverageannualgrowthrates

f nminl bnking sses in 20032007

wehaveestimatedat50.2%andbanks

claimsat44.5%.Ontheonehand,credit

growthsupportstheeconomy,buton

he he hnd i my esl in highe

risksfornancialstabilityandrequires

thefurthercapitalizationofthebank-

ing sysem nd bee mngemen f

nancialrisks.

the pid gwh f bnking sevices in

20022007didnotfullysaturatethemarket,

heefore,theremaininggrowthpotentialmo-

tivatesforeignbanksentry.Thebankingser-

vices mke hs gd penil f gwh

inthemedium and long-termperspective.

the mke gwh penil is deeminedby he mcecnmic fndmenls sch

ashigheconomicgrowth,investmentsand

consumption.Thebanking market growth

penil is diven by scl fcs sch

asmoderateconcentrationandcompetition,

thestartingphaseofconsolidation,lower

investmentsforincreasingthemarketshare,

agoodmarginalincome,relativelylowmar-

ketpenetration,roomforspilloverofnew

nancialproductsandtechnologies,alow

competitionfromthenon-bankingnancial

institutions.Suchapotentialisdeterminedby

he emining diffeence fm neighbing

cnies in he elive indics f bnking

servicespenetration:

Figure 1.Loans and deposits per capita in selected countries, 2006, $US

Source:NationalBankofUkraine,MinistryofStatisticsofUkraine.


6/11

127

the d shw h he penein -

i f bh lns nd depsis in ukine

emins wice lwe hn in rssi nd

Kazakhstanand310timeslowerthan

inselectedCEEcountries.Theprospectsf eching cmpble penein is

in 35 yes nd especive incese f

he mj segmens f he bnking mke

cld be cnsideed s he gwh penil

ofbankingservices.Itreectstheeffect

ofso-calledacceleratinggrowthfroma

lwe sing psiin wds he level

me dvnced hn he cnys level f

economicgrowth.

the cmpeiive demnd fm feign

banksisconcentratingontheacquisitionof

lge ukinin bnks wih he esblished

mke psiin nd gd gwh pen-

tial.Ithasusuallybeendeterminedbasedon

thehomehostbiasandasetofquantitative

andqualitativecriteria.

typicl ims slly sipled by f-eign bnks f geed ukinin bnks nd

heefe plying he key le f cmpei-

tionwithotherbiddersontheM&Amarket

arethefollowing:anetworkof50branches

andmore;presenceinallmajorregionsof

thecountry;thesharecapitalbookvalueof

$US100mill.andmore;credithistorywith

foreignbanks;afullbankinglicenseforall

bankingservices,etc.

the mj fees f he demnd cm-

peiin f he lge ukinin bnks

sharesacquisitionarethefollowing:

1. The demand is concentrating on the

lges ukinin bnks becse he

majorbuyersarelargeinternational -

nncil insiins nd hei im is ge

throughacquisitionasubstantil she ftheUkrainianbankingmarket.Foreign

bnks e epesened by he lges

diversiedglobalnancialgroup,and

hei behvi deemines cmpeiive

demnd cndiins f ukinin bnks

shares.2. Foreignbanksmostlytargetattheac-

quisitionof90100%ofsharesandthus

geing n lime cnl ve he

acquiredbanks.

3. LargeUkrainianbankswithawidenet-

wk f bnches nd lge nmbe f

csmes e he ms cive ge

forforeignbanks.Suchlargebanksare

thekeytargetsforacquisitioncompeti-

tionamongforeignbanks,andtheir

she pices e highe hn f smlle

banks.

the ecnmic indicin f sch cm-

peiive demnd f lge ukinin bnks

cld be ssessed s highe evlin f

he bnk shes (s he pice bk vle

i) in cmpisn wih neighbing

countries.Therelativelevelofpricereects

he cen peviling mke end fcs-

ingacquisitioncompetitiononthespecic

targetssuchaslargebanks.Inotherwords,

he elively limied spply nde sng

competitivedemandfromtheglobalnan -

cil insiins csed pice incese f

theshares.o clclin shws h he weighed

averageP/BVforUkrainianbanksis4.2

fortheperiod20042007.Asimilarratio

forRussiais2.75.Itindicatesahigher

elive mke vlin s esl f

highe cmpeiin f he ukinin bnks

shares,reectingabettergrowthpotential

andimprovingregulatoryconditions.

the spply-side cmpeiin is dieced

wds incesing he ffeing vle nd


7/11

128

sharepriceofthebanksutilizingpre-

acquisitionvalueenhancementstrategyto

getacquiredbyforeigninvestors.Sucha

strategyisemployedbythemedium-size

bnks wih limied cpbiliy incese

capitalizationandcompetewithlargeinsti-

tutions.Fromthesupplyside,competition

is dieced geing n ffe fm gd

internationalbank,sellingshareswiththe

highestpossibleP/BVratioandaclose

nscin he ime f bee mke cn-ditions.Medium-sizebanksutilizedifferent

pe-sell plicies incese hei mke

vle nd ge cive cmpeiive ffes

fromforeignbanks:

bwing fm he ineninl bnks

in de incese he cedi pfli

andassets;

develping llince-ype elins wih

majorinternationalbanks,suchas:trade

nancefacilities,letterofcreditand

bankguarantiesconrmationfacilities,

interbankstandingfacilities;develping lng-snding elins wih

Table 3. Major economic indicators of the Ukrainian banks shares acquisition by foreign

banks, 20042008

Buyer Target bak sharePrie,

mill. $UsP/BV

VilniausBankas(SEB gp membe) agi 95% 27.5 1.6RaiffeisenInternationalBankHol-Hl-Hl-

ding aG (asi)avl 94% 1028 3.2

Sbebnk (rssi) NRB-Ukraine 100% 150 3.7

BNPParibas(Fnce) uksibbnk 51% 367 3.4

Vneshgbnk (rssi) Mij 98% 70 1.6

Cedi agicle (Fnce) Index-Bank 98% 260 7.2

OTPBank(Hngy) riffeisen ukine 100% 827 5.2

EFG Ebnk (Geece) univeslny 99% 50 3

ErsteBank(asi) Pesije 100% 104 1.8

MarnPopularBank(Cyps) MTB 99% 137.4 5.1

Gein Hlding (Plnd) Pykpy 82% n/a n/a

Vlksbnk Ineninl (asi) Elecn 98% 75 3.8

Swedbnk (Sweden) taS-Kmesbnk 99% 735 4.5

PiraeusBankSA(Geece)Ineninl

cmmecil bnk99% 75 4.9

uniCedi Bank(Ily) ukssbnk 95% 2200 5.6

BankofGeorgia(Gegi) UBRP 99% 74 2.7

Commerzbank(Gemny) Fm 60% 600 5.1

SEB(Sweden) Fcil 97% 120 4.3

BankofCyprus(Cyps) Avtozaz 95% 76,1 4

BankHapoalim(Isel) ukinbnk 76% 135 2.2

Ines Snpl (Ily) Pravex 100% 750 5.2

AlphaBank(Geece) as 90% 120 1.5

Source:banksinformation,varioussources.P/BVshareacquisitionpricetoitsbookvalue.


8/11

129

networkclients,forexample,through

jin cd pdcs wih mbile sevices

operators,majorsupermarketchains,

airlines,etc.;

minoritysharesselltoEBRDinorder impve bnk cpe mngemen

andrating;

miniy shes sell n IPo pive

placementinordertogetpricequotation

oninternationalmarkets;

geing sbdined ln fm he

EBRDorotherinternationalinstitutions

inordertoincreasethesharecapital;

impving cedi ing by he mj

internationalratingagencies;

ineninl bnds Ebnds plce-

ment;

branchnetworkdevelopment;

developingtheretailmarketshare;

improvingbalancesheetprotability.

Mid-sizebankpre-sellpolicysometimes

mkes hem cive f glbl bnking

gps ineesed in geing sing pl-

formfordevelopingasizablemarketshare.

Inseveralcases,asaresultoftheeffective

pe-sell segy nd cmpeiive ffes

frominternationalbanks,medium-size

bnks g sccessfl sell f shes wih

theP/BVratioclosetoorabovetheaverage

forthelargeUkrainianbanks.

the nmbe nd he mke psiin f

he feign-wned bnks in ukine hs

beengrowinginthelastthreeyears,with

he pssibiliy ccpy p 50% f he

marketin20082009.Feign bnks my becme dmining

onthemarketincaseofprivatizationofthe

w emining lge se-wned bnks

Oschadbank(SavingsBank)andUkrexim-

bank(StateExport-ImportBank).

the ps-eny cmpeiive impc f

feign-wned bnks n he ukinin bnk-

ing mke cld be evled bsed n

differentcriteria,includingscale,scopeand

performanceindicators,protability,ratings,

etc.The structural comparative approach

gives he pssibiliy idenify he es in

which feign-wned bnks hve cmpeiive

advantagesandutilizethemtogaincompara-

ively bee esls hn hei mke psiin

measuredbytheratioofthesharecapital.

Forthispurpose,itcouldbepossibleto

se cmpive nlysis f he i f

scl cmpnens f he feign bnks

assets,liabilitiesandsharecapitalrelative

he sme indics f ll bnks nd

ssess he es f cmpeiive dvnges

of foreign-owned banks. Relative mea-

semens f sse sce nd effecive

mngemen f libiliies cld be sed s

Table 4. Foreign-owned banks in Ukraine, 20032008

foreig owed bak 1.01.2003 1.01.2004 1.01.2005 1.01.2006 1.01.2007 1.01.2008

Banksnumber 20 19 19 23 35 44

% f ll bnks

% f ll bnks she

cpil

13.7 11.3 9.6 19.6 27.6 33.0

Source: NationalBankofUkraine.

Foreign-ownedbanksbanksinwhich51%andmoresharesareinforeignownership.


9/11

130

acomplexapproachforevaluatingthepost-

eny impc f feign-wned bnks n he

bankingsectorstructureandcompetition.

the cmpive sce f he feign-

wned bnks sses indices h bnks

utilizethecompetitiveadvantageinretail

sevices sch s cnsme nd mgge

lending. Foreign-owned banks share in

eil lending f ll bnks (clims pive

individuals)isestimatedataround40%,

which is highe hn is elive weigh inthetotalbankssharecapital(33%).

the develpmen f eil bnking se-

vices is spped by he feign-wned

bnks cmpeiive dvnges sch s

accesstolong-termnancialliquidityand

securitization technologies. At the same

time,theretailbankingservicesaremost

protableinthelongrunandgeneratea

higheraccumulatedprotincomparison

withotherservices.Therefore,nowfour

foreign-ownedbanksholdapproximately

80%ofthemortgagenancinginUkraine.

Thecomplementaryeffectisthatatpresent,

feign cmpnies cncene me hn

50%ofthelifeinsurancemarketinUkraine,

minly hnks demnd f sch sevices

fromthemortgage-lendingbanks.

the feign-wned bnks hld simil

competitivepositioninotherprotableseg-

mens f eil sevices sch s c lns nd

consumerloans.Suchservicesalsorequireemploying access to long-term nancial

liquidity,insuranceandsecuritizationtech-

nologies.Otherinnovationspilloveronthe

eil mke e bnk cds wih debi nd

deposit management functions, cards for

smallbusinesscommercialborrowing.

Feign-wned bnks libiliies mn-

gemen indices h he scl fcs

also play a signicant role inenhancing

competitioninbanking.

Figure 2. Assets structure of foreign-owned: the ratio of foreign-owned banks to all banks in

Ukraine, 2007

Source : NationalBankofUkraine.

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%


10/11

131

Ontheliabilitiesmanagementside,the

feign-wned bnks cmpeiive dvnges

aredominatingsourcesofliquidityasbankslns (pimily fm he pen bnk) nd

41% f ll bnks vess hei weigh in she

capitalof33%.Thehigherweightofother

liabilities,whichmostlycomprisedocu -

mentaryoperationswiththeparentbank,

suchasbankguaranties,tradenancing,

etc.,alsoreectacomparativeadvantage

insourcingnancialliquidityanditseffec -

tiveutilization.Foreign-ownedbanksholdcmpively less depsis becse hey

useparentbankliquidityasthemainsource

oflending;forthesimilarreasontheyhold

comparativelylessreserves.

Conclusions

the sdy demnses h feign-wned

banksactivitiesexertastructuralimpact

n he mke f bnking sevices in nsi-

inl ecnmies nd hs enhnce cmpei-

Figure 3. Liabilities and own capital of foreign-owned banks: the ratio of foreign-owned banks

to all banks in Ukraine, 2007

Source : NationalBankofUkraine.

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

tion.Theresultsshowthelastingeconomic

effecs f feign-wned bnks,mainlydue

to capitalization, servicesdiversication,cross-borderbankingandinuenceonthe

developmentofthenancialsystem.Onthe

foreignbanksentrystage,thedemand-side

andsupply-sidecompetitionforacquisi-

in f he ukinin bnks shes hs

signicanteffecton increasingthe selling

priceofsharesandtheP/BVratio.Atthe

post-entrystage,theforeign-ownedbanks

utilizetheircompetitiveadvantagesandget cmpively highe mke psiin in

he key segmen f sses develpmen nd

liabilitiesmanagement.

an dvnced nlysis f he scl im-

pc f feign bnks eny in he ninl

bnking mke shld cve he isses f

entrycostandprotability,entryimpacton

bankscapitalization,thequalityofinvest-

mentsandservices,bankingsystemstability

andadjustmenttoexternalshocks.


11/11

132

REfEREncEs

BarthJ.,Caprio,G.,Nolle,D.(2004).Com-1.

parativeinternational characteristics of banking.

Economic andPolicyAnalysis WorkingPaper.

2004-01.Washington,Ofceof theComptrollerof

theCurrency.BarraktarN,WangY.(2004).Foreignbank2.

entry,performanceofdomesticbanksandsequence

ofnancialliberalization.PolicyResearchWorking

PaperNo.3416.WorldBank,Washington.

BergerA.,GeorgeR.,ClarkeR.,KlapperL.,3.

UdellG.(2005).Corporategovernanceandbank

performance:ajointanalysisofthestatic,selection

anddynamiceffectsofdomestic,foreignandstate

ownership.PolicyResearchWorkingPaperNo.3632.

WorldBank,Washington.

BoninJ., Hasan., Wachtel P. (2005). Bank4.performance,efciencyandownershipintransition

countries.Journal of Banking and Finance.No.29.

P.3153.

CabralI.,DierickF.,VesalaJ.(2002).Banking5.

Integrationintheeuroarea.ECBOccasionalPapers

Series.N.6.EuropeanCentralBank,Frankfurt.54p.

CasuB.,Girardone,C.,Molyneux,P.(2006).6.

IntroductiontoBanking.London,PrenticeHall.

526p.

Claessens S., Laeven L. (2006).Location7.

decisins f feign bnks nd cmpeiive advn-tage.workingpapersseriesNo.4113.WorldBank,

Washington.20.

ClaessensS.,LaevenL.(2003).Whatdives8.

bank competition? Some international evidence.

workingpapersseriesNo.3113.WorldBank,Wash-orkingpapersseriesNo.3113.WorldBank,Wash -

ington.33.

ECB(2008a)Cross-borderbank mergers &9.

acquisitionsandinternationalinvestors.ECBMonthly

Bulletin,October2008.Pp.6780.

ECB(2008b)EUBankingStructures2008.10.

ECB,Frankfurt.53p.

FocarelliD.,PozzoloA.(2001).Thepatterns11.f css-bde bnk meges nd shehlding in

OECDcountries.JournalofBankingandFinance.

No.25.P.23052337.

HavrylchukO.,JurzykE.(2006).Protability12.

foforeignbanksinCentralandeasternEurope.Does

theentrymodematters?BOFIT Discussion papers.

No.5.38p.

HeffernanS.(2004).Modernbanking.Chich-13.

ester,JohnWileyandSons.716p.

MatthewsK.,ThompsonJ.(2005).The14.

economicsof banking.Chichester, JohnWileyandSons.246p.

KarasA.,SchoorsK.,WeillL.(2008).Arepri-15.

vatebanksmoreefcientthanpublicbanks?Evidence

fromRussia.BOFITDiscussionPapers3.15p.

KoivuT.(2002).Doefcientbankingsector16.

accelerateeconomicgrowthintransition?Helsinki,

BOFITDiscussionPapersNo.14.28p.

LevensteijnM.,SerensenC.,BikkerJ.,van17.

RixtelA.(2008).Impactofbankcompetitiononthe

interestratepass-throughintheEuroarea.European

CentralBankWorkingPaperseries.No.885.41p.VolzU.(2004).Europeannancialintegra -18.

tionandthenancingoflocalbusinessesinthenew

EUmemberstates.EBRDWorkingpaper.No.89.

52p.

WeilL.(2003).Bankingefciencyinthe19.

transitionaleconomies.Economics of transition.No.

11(3).P.569592.

competitive impact of foreign banks_the case of ukraine

Documents