[We provide evidence that commercial banks extend their reputation in underwriting syndicated loans and private placements (private debt) to their bond-underwriting activities. In the absence of bond market reputation, private-debt-market reputation enables commercial banks to win underwriting mandates from their loan clients. Furthermore, it allows them to credibly commit to investors against opportunistically using lending information and thereby deliver superior certification benefits in the form of higher issue prices relative to investment-bank underwriters. This pricing benefit is not offset by higher underwriting fees and thus results in lower total issuance costs for borrowers.]

The re-entry of banking organizations into securities underwriting raises concerns over the possibility of banks using their lending-generated private information to benefit themselves and the issuing firm at the expense of investors. This paper illustrates the use of syndicate structure by lending banks to credibly commit against such opportunistic behavior and to exploit their proprietary information to lower issuance cost for borrowing firm issuers. We show that lending banks predominantly comanage with a high reputation nonlending underwriter. We present evidence that, relative to investment banks, comanaging issues allows lending banks to lower issuance costs for borrowing firms.

We provide evidence that commercial banks extend their reputation in underwriting syndicated loans and private placements (private debt) to their bond-underwriting activities. In the absence of bond market reputation, private-debt-market reputation enables commercial banks to win underwriting mandates from their loan clients. Furthermore, it allows them to credibly commit to investors against opportunistically using lending information and thereby deliver superior certification benefits in the form of higher issue prices relative to investment-bank underwriters. This pricing benefit is not offset by higher underwriting fees and thus results in lower total issuance costs for borrowers.

We study branch openings and closures in U.S. banking. Both are concentrated where depositors are rate-sensitive and place less value on physical access, patterns driven by financially sophisticated households with greater digital adoption. The effects are strongest for large banks, with lending playing a lesser role. Incumbents retain branches where depositors are less sensitive and more reliant on proximity; entrants avoid such markets because sticky customers are difficult to attract. The Pandemic accelerated closures while allowing banks to retain deposits through online channels. Overall, depositor sophistication — through rate sensitivity and reduced branch reliance — drives modern branch restructuring.