To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.
Fields:
36 results
✕ Clear filters
Upper and Lower Bounds of Put and Call Option Value: Stochastic Dominance Approach
Applying stochastic dominance rules with borrowing and lending at the risk‐free interest rate, we derive upper and lower values for an option price for all unconstrained utility functions and alternatively for concave utility functions. The derivation of these bounds is quite general and fits any kind of stock price distribution as long as it is characterized by a “nonnegative beta.” Transaction costs and taxes can be easily incorporated in the model presented here since investors are not required to revise their portfolios continuously. The “price” that is paid for this generalization is that a range of values rather than a unique value is obtained.
Stochastic Dominance: A Note
Diversification, Portfolio Analysis and the Uneasy Case for Conglomerate Mergers
DIVERSIFICATION, PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS AND THE UNEASY CASE FOR CONGLOMERATE MERGERS
Valuation, Leverage and the Cost of Capital in the Case of Depreciable Assets: A Reply
Valuation, Leverage, and the Cost of Capital in the Case of Depreciable Assets
Economic Evaluation of Voting Power of Common Stock
This paper presents an economic evaluation of common stock voting rights. An index of relative voting rights inequality for different classes of stock of the same corporation is constructed and the empirical relationship between the market premium on a superior-voting stock and the voting inequality index is examined. In only three out of the 25 cases could investors have arbitraged between the two classes of stock, although in one case the arbitrage opportunity persisted for several months.
Economic Evaluation of Voting Power of Common Stock
This paper presents an economic evaluation of common stock voting rights. An index of relative voting rights inequality for different classes of stock of the same corporation is constructed and the empirical relationship between the market premium on a superior‐voting stock and the voting inequality index is examined. In only three out of the 25 cases could investors have arbitraged between the two classes of stock, although in one case the arbitrage opportunity persisted for several months.