Alternative Investments Market
_Logo.png){kind=logo} |
|
| Type | |
|---|---|
| Location | London, United Kingdom |
| Founded | 19 June 1995 |
| Owner | |
| Key people | Marcus Stuttard Head of AIM |
| Currency | GBP, US$ |
| No. of listings | 1,254 |
| Website | |
AIM (formerly the Alternative Investment Market) is a sub-market of the that was launched on 19 June 1995. It allows smaller, less-viable companies to float with a more flexible regulatory system than is applicable to the main market.
At launch, AIM comprised only 10 companies valued collectively at £82.2 million. By 2017, over one thousand companies comprise the sub-market, with an average market cap of £80 million per listing. AIM has also started to become an international exchange, often due to its low regulatory burden, especially in relation to the U.S. Sarbanes–Oxley Act (though only a quarter of AIM-listed companies would qualify to list on a U.S. stock exchange even prior to passage of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act). As of December 2005 over 270 foreign companies had been admitted to the AIM.
The FTSE Group maintains three indices for measuring the AIM, which are the FTSE AIM UK 50 Index, FTSE AIM 100 Index, and FTSE AIM All-Share Index.
AIM is an exchange regulated venue featuring an array of principles-based rules for publicly held companies. AIM's regulatory model is based on a comply-or-explain option that lets companies that are floated on AIM either comply with AIM's relatively few rules, or explain why it has decided not to comply with them.
Aside from granting leeway in regard to regulatory compliance, the Exchange also mandates continuous oversight and advice by the issuer's underwriter, referred to as a Nominated Adviser (Nomad). The role of Nomads is central to AIM’s regulatory model, as these entities play the role of gatekeepers, advisers and regulators of AIM companies. In advising each firm as to which rules should be complied with and the manner in which existing requirements should be met, Nomads provide the essential service of allowing firms to abide by tailor-made regulation, reducing regulatory costs in the process. Theoretically, Nomads are liable for damages from tolerating misdemeanors on behalf of their supervised companies, including the loss of reputational capital. However, this heavy reliance on Nomads has been criticised as creating a conflict of interest, since Nomads receive fees from the companies they purportedly supervise while, in practice, managing to avoid liability for market misconduct.
...
Wikipedia