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

Fields:
2 results

The effect of the Sarbanes-Oxley act on non-US companies cross-listed in the US

Journal of Corporate Finance 2007 13(2-3), 195-228
This paper uses a natural experiment to measure market response to the adoption of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (ʽʽSOX"). Because SOX applies to all US public companies, US-based studies have difficulty separating the effects of contemporaneous events. However, controlled analysis is available: SOX applies to some cross-listed firms (those listed on level 2 or 3), but not to others (listed on level 1 or 4). By comparing reactions of SOX-exposed foreign firms to reactions of otherwise similar SOX-unexposed foreign firms, we can test investor beliefs about the costs and benefits of SOX in a way that is not cleanly available for US-based studies. We find that stock prices of foreign firms subject to SOX declined (increased) significantly, compared to cross-listed firms not subject to SOX and to non-cross-listed firms, during key announcements indicating that SOX would (would not) fully apply to cross-listed issuers. In cross-sectional tests, high-disclosing firms and firms from high-disclosing countries experienced the strongest declines, while faster-growing companies experienced weaker declines. This evidence is consistent with the view that investors expected the Sarbanes–Oxley Act to have a net negative effect on cross-listed foreign companies, with high-disclosing and low-growth companies suffering larger net costs, and faster-growing companies suffering smaller costs, particularly when they are located in poorly governed countries.

Does Reputation Limit Opportunistic Behavior in the VC Industry? Evidence from Litigation against VCs

Journal of Finance 2012 67(6), 2215-2246
ABSTRACT We examine the role of reputation in limiting opportunistic behavior by venture capitalists towards four types of counterparties: entrepreneurs, investors, other VCs, and buyers of VC‐backed startups. Using a hand‐collected database of lawsuits, we document that more reputable VCs (i.e., VCs that are older, have more deals and funds under management, and syndicate with larger networks of VCs) are less likely to be litigated. We also find that litigated VCs suffer declines in future business relative to matched peers. These declines are larger for more reputable VCs, and for VCs that are defendants to multiple lawsuits or sued by entrepreneurs.