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.

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.

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.

This paper analyses the determinants of venture capital for a sample of 21 countries. In particular, we consider the importance of initial public offerings (IPOs), gross domestic product (GDP) and market capitalization growth, labor market rigidities, accounting standards, private pension funds, and government programs. We find that IPOs are the strongest driver of venture capital investing. Private pension fund levels are a significant determinant over time but not across countries. Surprisingly, GDP and market capitalization growth are not significant. Government policies can have a strong impact, both by setting the regulatory stage, and by galvanizing investment during downturns. Finally, we also show that different types of venture capital financing are affected differently by these factors. In particular, early stage venture capital investing is negatively impacted by labor market rigidities, while later stage is not. IPOs have no effect on early stage venture capital investing across countries, but are a significant determinant of later stage venture capital investing across countries. Finally, government funded venture capital has different sensitivities to the determinants of venture capital than non-government funded venture capital. Our insights emphasize the need for a more differentiated approach to venture capital, both from a research as well as from a policy perspective. We feel that while later stage venture capital investing is well understood, early stage and government funded investments still require more extensive research.