Knowledge that Transforms

We examine the accuracy of various estimates of firms' repurchases of common stock used in earlier studies, and find high error rates in the most commonly used estimators. We also find that the procedure used to estimate open market share repurchases can significantly impact results. The Compustat-based measure, which is the most accurate, deviates from the actual number of shares repurchased by more than 30% in about 16% of the cases. We conclude that many studies should be revisited now that the SEC mandates disclosure of precise information about share repurchases in Forms 10-Q and 10-K.

Protective governance structure is often viewed as costly to minority shareholders who bear the costs of opportunism by entrenched managers. A less common view is that protective governance encourages value-enhancing initiative, allowing risk-averse managers to pursue projects they would otherwise forgo. To assess these views we examine the acquisition decisions of S&P 500 firms between 1994 and 2005 and document two entrenching dimensions of governance: founding family presence and larger boards with more inside directors. We find that family firms destroy value when they acquire, consistent with an agency cost explanation for acquisitions. In contrast, firms with large boards and more insiders are more likely to acquire and to create value when they do acquire. These results are consistent with benefits to managerial initiative when managers are insulated from discipline. Finally, we find no systematic evidence that shareholder right limiting provisions either facilitate managerial entrenchment or lead to wealth losses through acquisition activity.

This article makes two important contributions to the literature on the incentive effects of insider ownership. First, it presents a clean method for separating the positive wealth effect of insider ownership from the negative entrenchment effect, which can be applied to samples of companies from the US and any other country. Second, it measures the effects of insider ownership using a measure of firm performance, namely a marginal q, which ensures that the causal relationship estimated runs from ownership to performance. The article applies this method to a large sample of publicly listed firms from the Anglo-Saxon and Civil law traditions and confirms that managerial entrenchment has an unambiguous negative effect on firm performance as measured by both Tobin's (average) q and our marginal q, and that the wealth effect of insider ownership is unambiguously positive for both measures. We also test for the effects of ownership concentration for other categories of owners and find that while institutional ownership improves the performance in the USA, financial institutions have a negative impact in other Anglo-Saxon countries and in Europe.

The empirically-observed cross-sectional relation between the level of insider share ownership and the level of firm value has often been interpreted to mean that a change in share ownership can lead to a change in firm value. Such an interpretation has been criticized for ignoring potential endogeneity. In this paper, we perform two sets of tests to circumvent this alleged endogeneity. First, we measure changes in value over the 6-day interval around announcements of insider share purchases and find that the cross-sectional variability in changes in value is described by a curvilinear relation between firm value and insider ownership where the value of the firm first increases, then decreases, as insider share ownership increases. Second, we conduct tests to determine (1) whether the insider purchases are a response to changes in firm characteristics that require a new optimal equilibrium ownership level or (2) whether insiders are purchasing shares to signal that the firm is undervalued. We find no evidence to support these interpretations. Overall, our results are consistent with a causal interpretation of the empirical relation between insider ownership and firm value.

We examine the effects of credit ratings on IPO pricing. The evidence from U.S. common share IPOs during 1986–2004 shows that when firms go public, those with credit ratings are underpriced significantly less than firms without credit ratings. Credit rating levels, however, do not have a significant effect on IPO underpricing. The existence of credit rating reduces uncertainty about firm value. It is the value certainty that matters, not the value per se. Credit ratings also reduce the degree of price revision during the bookbuilding process and the aftermarket volatility in the post-IPO period. The evidence suggests that credit ratings convey useful information in reducing value uncertainty of the issuing firms as well as information asymmetry in the IPO markets.

This paper provides a theory for the choice of an organizational structure by the headquarters of a unitary structure concerned about overload. The headquarters can avoid overload by delegating operational decisions to divisions, i.e., moving the firm to a multidivisional structure. We show that, under moral hazard, these divisions receive rents for incentive purposes, and that the multidivisional structure is able to invest more. Thus, there is a trade-off between increasing investment and paying rents. We also show that this trade-off applies to situations where firms consider engaging in acquisitions and joint ventures, or where entrepreneurs consider resorting to venture capitalists.

Companies have the choice to deviate from their national corporate governance standards by opting into another system. They can do so via contractual devices – such as cross-border mergers and acquisitions, (re)incorporations, and cross-listings – which enable them to choose their preferred level of investor protection and regulation. This paper reviews these three main contractual governance devices, their effect on value, and whether their adoption by firms induces a race to the bottom or a race to the top. Indeed, firms may opt for less shareholder-orientation or investor protection (shareholder-expropriation hypothesis) rather than for more stringent rules that require firms to focus on shareholder value (bonding hypothesis).

We investigate IPO market efficiency using a sample of equity carve-outs offered during the period of 1985–2005. Unlike IPOs examined in previous studies where trading during the pre-IPO book-building period does not exist and trading on the IPO date is rationed, in equity carve-outs, investors can trade in the non-rationed market for shares of the parent, which holds a significant fraction of the subsidiary. We find that the subsidiary's initial day return is significantly related to its parent's return over the book-building period, but unrelated to its parent's contemporaneous return. Neither the pre-IPO price revision of the subsidiary nor the return to the parent on the initial trading day can be predicted. While the portion of the subsidiary's initial return unpredictable from information available during the book-building period is significantly related to its parent's contemporaneous return, the predictable component of the initial return is not. We interpret these results as evidence consistent with market efficiency.