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

Fields:
8 results

Lending Relationships and Information Rents: Do Banks Exploit Their Information Advantages?

Review of Financial Studies 2010 23(3), 1149-1199
[In the process of lending to a firm, a bank acquires proprietary firm-specific information that is unavailable to nonlenders. This asymmetric evolution of information between lenders and prospective lenders grants the former an information monopoly. This article empirically investigates whether relationship banks exploit this advantage by charging higher interest rates than those that would prevail were all banks symmetrically informed. My identification strategy hinges on the notion that large information shocks that level the playing field among banks erode the relationship bank's information monopoly. I use the borrower's initial public offering (IPO) as such an information-releasing event, and build a panel dataset in which the unit of observation is a firm's lending relationships before and after its IPO. Prior to a firm's IPO, I find a U-shaped relation between borrowing rates and relationship intensity. After the IPO, interest rates are decreasing in relationship intensity. Furthermore, mean interest rates drop after an IPO. The results are robust to firm and loan-year fixed effects, and to controls for firm leverage pre-and post-IPO. Thus, the reported interest rate pattern is clean of any confounding effects that might arise from changes in financial risk.]

The Effect of Banking Relationships on the Firm's IPO Underpricing

Journal of Finance 2004 59(6), 2903-2958
This paper investigates the effects of pre‐IPO banking relationships on a firm's IPO. Using a new and unique data set, which compares the firm's pre‐IPO banking relationships to the underwriters managing the firm's new issue, I test whether banking relationships established before the firm's IPO ameliorate asymmetric informa tion problems behind high IPO underpricing. The results show that firms with a pre‐IPO banking relationship with a prospective underwriter face about 17% lower underpricing than firms without such banking relationships. These results are robust to controlling for the firm's endogenous selection of the pre‐IPO banking institution.

Conflict of interest and certification in the U.S. IPO market

Journal of Financial Intermediation 2010 19(2), 235-254
We examine the long-term return performance of U.S. IPOs underwritten by relationship banks. We show that, over one- to three-year horizons, IPOs managed by relationship banks experience buy-and-hold benchmark-adjusted returns that are similar to those observed for a matching sample of stocks managed by non-relationship underwriters. This result holds even when the returns' skewness and cross-sectional correlation is accounted for. Further, we examine the calendar-time returns on a portfolio that is long the stocks underwritten by relationship banks and short ex-ante similar stocks taken public by non-relationship institutions. Again, we conclude that the two groups of IPOs yield similar long-run returns. These findings support the certification role of relationship banks and suggest that, in this respect, the effect of the 1999 repeal of Sections 20 and 32 of the Glass–Steagall Act has not been negative.

Incentives and Competition in the Airline Industry

The Review of Corporate Finance Studies 2019 8(2), 380-428
We examine how performance changes at airlines in response to a change in executive incentives. Airlines with executive bonuses contingent on on-time arrival do improve on-time performance. We find evidence of strategic gaming of the incentive as some carriers increase scheduled flight times, making it easier for flights to arrive on time. This effect is more pronounced for competitive routes. Carriers also do not decrease the frequency of flights or the number of passengers to make it easier to be on time, but they do slightly decrease fares. Competitors on the same routes also improve their on-time performance, even when their executive bonuses are not contingent on on-time performance, consistent with competition in strategic complements. (JEL G30, G34, G32) Received February 5, 2018; editorial decision April 3, 2019 by Editor Andrew Ellul.

Are the bankrupt skies the friendliest?

Journal of Corporate Finance 2012 18(5), 1217-1231
We use data from the US airline industry to investigate whether firms that are under bankruptcy protection, as well as these firm's product market rivals, change the quality of the products they offer. We measure the quality of the services offered by a carrier using flight cancelations and delays, and the age of the aircraft used by the carrier. We find that delays and cancelations are less frequent during bankruptcy filings but return to their pre-bankruptcy levels once the bankrupt firm emerges from bankruptcy. We also find that firms use Chapter 11 filings to permanently reduce the age of their fleet. We do not find evidence of statistically and economically significant changes by the airline's competitors along any of the dimensions above.

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.

Common Ownership Does Not Have Anticompetitive Effects in the Airline Industry

Journal of Finance 2022 77(5), 2765-2798 open access
Institutions often own equity in multiple firms that compete in the same product market. Prior research has shown that these institutional “common owners” induce anticompetitive pricing behavior in the airline industry. This paper reevaluates this evidence and shows that the documented positive correlation between common ownership and airline ticket prices stems from the market share component of the common ownership measure, and not the ownership and control components. We further show that the results are sensitive to measures of investor control and to assumptions about equity holders' ownership and control during bankruptcy.