Knowledge that Transforms

To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
8 results ✕ Clear filters

Multifaceted Transactions and Organizational Ownership

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(1), 22-69
I provide a unified explanation for shareholder ownership, partnerships, mutuals, government ownership, cooperatives, and vertical and horizontal control: each ownership form constitutes a variation on a single underlying theme, the assignment of ownership to a subset of firm stakeholders. When not every facet of a transaction is contractible and high-powered incentives might divert investment toward the transaction’s contractible facets, to the overall transaction’s possible detriment, optimal organizational ownership allocates the right to set the power of managerial incentives to those stakeholders most affected by the noncontractible facets of the organization’s paramount transaction. Received August 3, 2016; editorial decision August 2, 2017 by Editor Uday Rajan.

Investment-Banking Relationships: 1933–2007

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(2), 194-244 open access
We study the evolution of investment-banking relationships from 1933 to 2007. Relationship exclusivity and client concerns for the state of their banking relationships were strong through the first part of our sample period but then entered a period of sharp decline beginning around 1970. We interpret the bank-client relationship as an informal governance mechanism for curbing opportunistic behavior in a weak contracting environment and examine how technological change aggravated conflicts of interest within investment banks and between banks and their clients. This perspective sheds light on why trust between banks and their clients now appears to be in short supply.Received March 2, 2018; editorial decision June 11, 2018 by Editor Paolo Fulghieri.

Within-Bank Spillovers of Real Estate Shocks

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(2), 157-193 open access
By considering banks as portfolios of assets in different locations, we study how real estate shocks are transmitted across bank’s business areas, while controlling for local demand shocks and bank location-specific factors. Affected banks substantially alter their loan portfolios: we find evidence of real estate price declines affecting both real estate and non-real-estate types of lending. Banks also roll over and fail to liquidate problematic loans, while accumulating more nonperforming loans. These results provide evidence of internal contagion in real estate shocks within banks.

Shareholder Bargaining Power, Debt Overhang, and Investment

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(2), 276-318
Using a dynamic model of strategic bargaining between equity and debt holders following default, we analyze the impact of shareholder bargaining power and debt overhang on optimal investment and strategic default. Our empirical tests utilize a new measure of the debt overhang wedge based on default probabilities generated from a hazard model for bankruptcy. Consistent with the theoretical predictions, bondholder (shareholder) ownership concentration ceteris paribus enhances (weakens) the overhang wedge and dampens (increases) capital investment. We identify novel ownership-structure-related factors in firm-level capital investment and document how post-default shareholder bargaining power alleviates the underinvestment problem caused by debt overhang. Received March 26, 2018; editorial decision June 20, 2018 by Editor: Paolo Fulghieri.

An Unexpected Test of the Bonding Hypothesis

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(1), 101-156
In its 2010 Morrison v. National Australia Bank ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that key fraud-related provisions of U.S. securities laws would apply only to transactions in foreign securities that take place on U.S. exchanges. We document a large increase in the price of U.S. cross-listed foreign stocks relative to their currency-adjusted equivalent home-market shares around the decision, which we associate with the newly differentiated legal status accorded U.S. cross-listed shares. The market’s reaction to the decision affirms that investors value how U.S. securities laws apply an element of the “bonding” hypothesis as a motive for international cross-listings. Received June 7, 2017; editorial decision November 13, 2017 by Editor Paolo Fulghieri.

Does Contract Enforcement Mitigate Holdup?*

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(2), 245-275
This paper provides novel evidence that stronger contract enforcement mitigates holdup in business investment decisions using stark, externally imposed variation in contract enforcement across Native American reservations. My tests focus on the golf course industry. A high degree of sunk costs and long investment horizons in this industry make it naturally subject to the classical holdup problem. I find that state courts, which provide stronger contract enforcement than do tribal courts, lead to at least 27% more golf courses, with greater effects in areas with greater natural amenities. These findings suggest that courts play an important role in facilitating the oft-discussed contractual solutions to the holdup problem. Received November 13, 2017; editorial decision May 31, 2018 by Editor: Uday Rajan.

Identification Is Not Causality, and Vice Versa

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(1), 1-21 open access
We distinguish between identification and establishing causality. Identification means forming a unique mapping from features of data to quantities that are of interest to economists. Establishing causality by finding sources of exogenous variation is often considered synonymous with identification, but these two concepts are distinct. Exogenous variation is only sometimes necessary and never sufficient to identify economically interesting parameters. Instead, even for causal questions, identification must rest on an underlying economic model. We illustrate these points by analyzing identification in three recent papers and by examining the estimation of a simple dynamic model. Received June 6, 2017; editorial decision September 26, 2017 by Editor Gregor Matvos. Authors have furnished supplementary code, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Robust Models of CEO Turnover: New Evidence on Relative Performance Evaluation

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2018 7(1), 70-100
We examine the robustness of empirical models and findings concerning CEO turnover. We show that the sensitivity of turnover to abnormal firm performance is an extremely robust result. In contrast, evidence indicating a relation between turnover and industry performance is both weak and fragile. We show that small changes in turnover modeling choices can affect inferences in a large way. Our evidence casts substantial doubt on the hypothesis that there is a large industry performance component to turnover decisions. We use our findings to offer some general prescriptions for checking robustness results in CEO turnover research. Received June 6, 2017; editorial decision July 10, 2017 by Editor Uday Rajan.