The underpricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) is generally explained with asymmetric information and risk. We complement these traditional explanations with a new theory where investors worry also about the after-market illiquidity that may result from asymmetric information after the IPO. The less liquid the aftermarket is expected to be, and the less predictable its liquidity, the larger will be the IPO underpricing. Our model blends such liquidity concerns with adverse selection and risk as motives for underpricing. The model's predictions are supported by evidence for 337 British IPOs effected between 1998 and 2000. Using various measures of liquidity, we find that expected after-market liquidity and liquidity risk are important determinants of IPO underpricing.

This paper uses a sample of large trades executed on the London Stock Exchange's SEAQ-I market for European cross-traded firms to investigate their impact on home market prices when parallel markets suffer from information frictions. I find that (a) large London trades produce price impacts in home markets even though no timely information is published, (b) market makers appear to pre- and post-position their inventories by splitting orders across markets, and (c) the price discovery process across markets changes significantly around large trades with the foreign market making a significantly bigger contribution to price discovery at this time, even though information opaqueness exists.

Using a firm-level international panel data set, we study if unemployment insurance offered by the government and by firms are substitutes. We exploit cross-country and time-series variation in public unemployment insurance as a shifter of workers’ demand for insurance within firms, and family versus nonfamily ownership as a shifter of firms’ supply of insurance. Our evidence supports the substitutability hypothesis: employment stability in family firms is greater, and the wage discount larger, in countries and periods with less generous public unemployment insurance, whereas no such substitutability emerges for nonfamily firms.

[This paper shows that during episodes of market turmoil, 13F institutional investors with short trading horizons sell their stockholdings to a larger extent than 13F institutional investors with longer trading horizons. This creates price pressure for stocks held mostly by short-horizon investors, which, as a consequence, experience larger price drops, and subsequent reversals, than stocks held mostly by long-horizon investors. These findings, obtained after controlling for the withdrawals experienced by the investors, are not driven by other institutional investors' and firms' characteristics. Overall, the evidence indicates that investors with short horizons amplify the effects of market-wide negative shocks by demanding liquidity at times when other potential buyers' capital is scarce.]

Corporate leverage responds differently to employees’ rights in bankruptcy depending on whether it is driven by strategic concerns in wage bargaining or by credit constraints. Using novel data on employees’ rights in bankruptcy, we estimate their impact on leverage, exploiting time-series, cross-country, and firm-level variation in the data. For financially unconstrained firms, results accord with the strategic debt model: leverage increases more in response to rises in corporate property values or profitability if employees have strong seniority in liquidation and weak rights in restructuring. Instead, in financially constrained firms leverage responds less to these shocks if employees have stronger seniority.

By collecting and disseminating price-sensitive information, financial analysts should reduce firm insiders’ informational advantage with a consequent impact on trading dynamics and market quality. We empirically examine the impact of complete analysts’ coverage termination on stocks’ liquidity, price discovery, and insider trading profitability. Termination leads to deteriorating liquidity and price efficiency, more informed trading, and higher profitability of insider trades. The magnitude of these effects depends on the strength of insiders’ ownership and on management’s decision whether to improve the firm’s information environment after coverage termination. Institutional investors alleviate, but do not eliminate, the negative effects of termination.

The underpricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) is generally explained with asymmetric information and risk. We complement these traditional explanations with a new theory where investors worry also about the after-market illiquidity that may result from asymmetric information after the IPO. The less liquid the aftermarket is expected to be, and the less predictable its liquidity, the larger will be the IPO underpricing. Our model blends such liquidity concerns with adverse selection and risk as motives for underpricing. The model’s predictions are supported by evidence for 337 British IPOs effected between 1998 and 2000. Using various measures of liquidity, we find that expected after-market liquidity and liquidity risk are important determinants of IPO underpricing.

This paper examines the effect of going public on firm-level employment. To establish a causal effect, we employ a novel data set of private firms to investigate employment growth in IPO firms relative to a group of firms that file for an IPO but subsequently withdraw their offering. We find that employment increases significantly after going public, and the increase is more pronounced in industries with requirements for highly skilled labor and greater dependence on external finance. Improved ability to undertake acquisitions and a strategic shift toward commercialization, rather than agency problems, explain employment growth. Overall, these results highlight the importance of going public for firms’ employment policies.

The COVID-19 pandemic can be considered the third major shock to have hit the United States and the global economy in the first two decades of this century. First, we experienced the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, then the 2008-2009 Financial Crisis, and now the COVID-19 pandemic. Each of these crises confronted the global economy, and the financial system in particular, with different challenges, with the COVID-19 crisis likely to be the worst. According to the World Bank (2020), the global economy is expected to shrink by 5.2% this year, representing the deepest global recession since the Second World War.

Entrepreneurs may be legally bound to bequeath a minimal stake to noncontrolling heirs. The size of this stake can reduce investment in family firms, by reducing the future income they can pledge to external financiers. Using a purpose-built indicator of the permissiveness of inheritance law and data for 10,004 firms from 38 countries in 1990–2006, we find that stricter inheritance law is associated with lower investment in family firms but does not affect investment in nonfamily firms. Moreover, as the model predicts, inheritance law affects investment only in family firms that experience a succession. (JEL G31, G32, K22, L26, O17).