Firms increasingly issue shares for the purpose of cash savings. During the 1970s, 1.00 of issuance resulted in 0.23 of cash savings; over the most recent decade, 1.00 of issuance resulted in 0.60 of cash savings. This increase is caused by increasing precautionary motives. Proxies for precautionary motives increase over the sample period, and firm-level increases in these proxies are associated with firm-level increases in share issuance–cash savings. Share issuance–cash savings are inversely related to issuance costs, suggesting that firms issue and save when costs are low, so as to avoid issuing when costs are high. This framework can also help explain patterns and trends in share issuance activity over time. Market timing does not explain these effects, as share issuance–cash savings are not related to post-issuance stock returns.

We develop a theory of initial public offering (IPO) underpricing based on differentiated underwriting services and localized competition. Even though a large number of investment banks compete for IPOs, if issuers care about non-price dimensions of underwriting, then the industry structure is best characterized as a series of local oligopolies. We test our model implications on all-star analyst coverage, industry expertise, and other non-price dimensions. Furthermore, we posit that venture capitalists (VCs) are especially focused on all-star analyst coverage, and develop the analyst lust theory of the underpricing of VC-backed IPOs. Consistent with this theory, we find that VC-backed IPOs are much more underpriced when they have coverage from an all-star analyst.

We examine how firms redraw their boundaries after acquisitions using plant-level data. We find that there is extensive restructuring in a short period following mergers and full-firm acquisitions. Acquirers of full firms sell 27% and close 19% of the plants of target firms within three years of the acquisition. Acquirers with skill in running their peripheral divisions tend to retain more acquired plants. Retained plants increase in productivity whereas sold plants do not. These results suggest that acquirers restructure targets in ways that exploit their comparative advantage.