Many studies use the book value of debt as a proxy for its market value because most corporate debt does not trade. I call this practice the book value of debt (BVD) approximation, and it appears to be justified by the observation that the average market value of debt is close to its book value. Many corporate bonds, however, trade at values significantly different from their book values, and consequently the BVD approximation can create important biases. I compare the accuracy of the BVD approximation to Merton's option pricing (OPT) model of corporate debt valuation, and find consistent evidence that the Merton model provides more accurate estimates. I also show that this model is an easily estimated alternative to the BVD approximation. In short, the BVD approximation not only creates significant biases, but it is also an unnecessary simplification.

Myers and Majluf [Myers, S.C., Majluf, N.S., 1984. Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics 13, 187–221.] showed that mispriced securities can lead managers with private information to invest inefficiently. It seems plausible that this problem would disappear in a fully revealing equilibrium, since information asymmetries are resolved and securities are priced correctly. In fact, Constantinides and Grundy [Constantinides, G.M., Grundy, B.D., 1989. Optimal investment with stock repurchase and financing as signals. Review of Financial Studies 2, 445–465.] claim that, in their model, any fully revealing equilibrium has efficient investment. This claim is incorrect, as infinitely many inefficient equilibria exist for the very example they work out. The inefficient outcomes survive the standard signaling-game equilibrium refinements. There are also examples that have fully revealing equilibria with inefficient investment but none with efficient investment.

This paper presents an asymmetric information model of share repurchases when shareholders have heterogeneous reservation values. Consistent with empirical evidence, managers in the model repurchase shares at a premium above the post-repurchase share value — transferring wealth from shareholders who do not tender to those who do — in order to signal that the firm is undervalued. Such dilutive repurchases would not occur under the classical assumption of perfectly elastic share supply; they depend critically on shareholder heterogeneity. It is also shown that repurchases are more efficient signals than other strategies like dividends and ‘burning money’. The model's implications are consistent with much empirical evidence regarding announcement returns, repurchase size, repurchase premiums and expiration-day price drops.

We examine the underinvestment rationale for corporate hedging and test the hypothesis that if firms hedge to reduce both their reliance on external funds and the volatility of internal cash flow, then their investment spending should be less sensitive to prehedged cash flow. Our results are consistent with this hypothesis and indicate that investment spending is less sensitive to cash flow for hedgers than for nonhedgers. We also find that among hedgers, investment spending is less sensitive to cash flow when the extent of hedging is higher. Our results are generally robust to five different measures of cash flow.

We empirically examine whether firms increase financial leverage following mergers. Firms could increase financial leverage either because of an increase in debt capacity or because of unused debt capacity from pre-merger years. We find that financial leverage of combined firms increases significantly following mergers. A cross-sectional analysis shows that the change in financial leverage around mergers is significantly positively correlated with the announcement period market-adjusted returns. Further tests indicate that the increase in financial leverage is an outcome of an increase in debt capacity, although there is weak evidence that some of the increase in financial leverage is a result of past unused debt capacity.

On theoretical grounds, monitoring of top executives by the (supervisory) board is expected to be value relevant. The empirical evidence is ambiguous and we analyze three non-competing explanations for this ambiguity: (i) The positive effect on firm value of board monitoring is hidden in stock price effects due to the simultaneous occurrence of the positive real effect of monitoring and the opposing information effect. (ii) The combination of board monitoring and monitoring by other parties prevents assessing the value relevance of board monitoring in isolation. (iii) The confounding effect of a simultaneous successor appointment typically generates an upward biased estimate. Based on an analysis of price effects and trading volumes at announcement, we conclude that monitoring by the supervisory board is valued by investors: Forced departures of executive directors, also without a successor appointment, are value relevant in the Netherlands where external control mechanisms and shareholder control were virtually absent in the period studied (1991–2000).

We develop a model for the use of stock options in compensation agreements based on a financing explanation. Our model is consistent with the extensive use of options for non-executive employees. Simulation results from our model show an optimal use of options of about 9.3% of total compensation for a non-executive employee with a compensation of US$50,000. Finding an optimal level of options as part of compensation in this context requires a balancing of two opposing factors—the benefit of a lower capital issuance cost versus a higher compensation cost as a result of the discount that an employee places on options because of an undiversified position.

Corporate governance and managerial behavior, both in terms of entrenchment and financial leverage, have been individually shown to directly affect firm performance and to indirectly affect it through influence on other determinants of performance. Employing an empirical model that captures documented interactions among the explanatory variables, we examine the importance of these integrated factors in an investment decision by focusing on the determinants of bank bidding activity for failed thrift institutions. While the endogenous relationships based on previous research appear tractable, their overall addition to the explanatory power of the bidding model based on traditional auction variables is very limited. These results suggest questions that should be further examined regarding how much managerial variables as defined by previous studies actually affect firm investment decisions once their endogeneity and unique linkages are formally recognized.

This study shows that shareholders of a firm that divests assets receive gains that are significantly related to stock ownership by the firm's managers and to the proportion of outside directors on the firm's board when the divestiture produces positive total dollar gains. Our results agree with the notions that higher levels of ownership give managers the incentive to sell assets that create negative synergies, the incentive to negotiate the best price for shareholders, and that outside directors fulfill their responsibilities as effective monitors and advisors to management.

Following the dividend flexibility hypothesis used by DeAngelo and DeAngelo (2006), Blau and Fuller (2008), and others, we theoretically extend the proposition of DeAngelo and DeAngelo (2006) optimal payout policy in terms of the flexibility dividend hypothesis. In addition, we also introduce growth rate, systematic risk, and total risk variables into the theoretical model. To test the theoretical results derived in this paper, we use the data collected in the US from 1969 to 2009 to investigate the impact of the growth rate, systematic risk, and total risk on the optimal payout ratio in terms of the fixed-effect model. We find that based on flexibility considerations, a company will reduce its payout when the growth rate increases. In addition, we find that a nonlinear relationship exists between the payout ratio and the risk. In other words, the relationship between the payout ratio and the risk is negative (or positive) when the growth rate is higher (or lower) than the rate of return on total assets. Our theoretical model and empirical results can therefore be used to identify whether flexibility or the free cash flow hypothesis should be used to determine the dividend policy.