Numerous studies observe abnormal returns after the announcement of quarterly earnings. Ball (1978) suggests those returns are not evidence of market inefficiency, but instead are due to deficiencies in the capital asset-pricing model. This paper tests whether abnormal returns are observed when steps are taken to reduce the effect of deficiencies in the capital asset-pricing model. Significant abnormal returns are observed, but do not cover the transactions costs unless one can avoid direct transactions costs (e.g., a broker). The paper also investigates whether those abnormal returns can be attributed to a deficiency in the capital asset-pricing model. The conclusion is they cannot.

We examine explanations for corporate financing-, dividend-, and compensation-policy choices. We document robust empirical relations among corporate policy decisions and various firm characteristics. Our evidence suggests contracting theories are more important in explaining cross-sectional variation in observed financial, dividend, and compensation policies than either tax-based or signaling theories.

This paper studies the association between a firm's stock returns and subsequent top management changes. Consistent with internal monitoring of management, there is an inverse relation between the probability of a management change and a firm's share performance. This relation can result from monitoring by the board, other top managers, or blockholders. However, unless share performance is extremely good or bad, logit models have no predictive ability. No average stock price reaction is detected at announcement of a top management change.