We hypothesize that firms choose dividend increases to distribute relatively permanent cash-flow shocks and repurchases to distribute more transient shocks. As predicted, we find that post-shock cash flows of dividend increasing firms exhibit less reversion to pre-shock levels compared with repurchasing firms. We also examine whether the stock market uses the announcement of the payout method to update its beliefs about the permanence of cash-flow shocks. Controlling for payout size and the market's expectation about the permanence of the cash-flow shock, the stock price reaction to dividend increases is more positive than the reaction to repurchases.

I document the shift of high-yield issuance from the public to the Rule 144A private placement market and exploit data on credit spreads to investigate whether investors regard disclosure in the two markets as comparable. The key implications of the inadequate-disclosure hypothesis are that investors require premiums on 144A securities and that such premiums are largest for first-time bond issuers and privately owned firms about whom less information is publicly available. I find that 144A premiums, though positive initially, have vanished over time, and I find no evidence of larger 144A premiums for first-time issuers or private firms. Investors do, however, require premiums of first-time issuers, and to a lesser extent of privately owned firms, regardless of whether securities are issued in the 144A or public market. These findings imply that sophisticated investors do not value the incremental information provided by securities registration, but do value ongoing disclosure.

We examine valuation effects of announcements of seasoned equity issuance and assess the impact of the choice of flotation method in the U.K. Rights offerings are predominant, but in 1986, British firms gained the flexibility to conduct placings, which are comparable to U.S. firm commitment offerings. A placing is a fixed-price bought deal that increases ownership dispersion. Placings generate significantly positive share price effects, whereas rights offerings have large negative valuation effects that become more adverse after 1985. We conclude that the option to conduct placings enhances the ability of firms to signal their quality and to use a seasoned equity offering to reduce ownership concentration.

Continuous-time stochastic processes are approximations to physically realizable phenomena. We quantify one aspect of the approximation errors by characterizing the asymptotic distribution of the replication errors that arise from delta-hedging derivative securities in discrete time, and introducing the notion of temporal granularity which measures the extent to which discrete-time implementations of continuous-time models can track the payoff of a derivative security. We show that granularity is a particular function of a derivative contract's terms and the parameters of the underlying stochastic process. Explicit expressions for the granularity of geometric Brownian motion and an Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process for call and put options are derived, and we perform Monte Carlo simulations to illustrate the empirical properties of granularity.

This paper examines the costs and determinants of order aggressiveness. Aggressive orders have larger price impacts but smaller opportunity costs than passive orders. Price impacts are amplified by large orders, small firms, and volatile stock prices. To minimize the implementation shortfall, the optimal strategy is to enter buy (sell) orders at the bid (ask). Aggressive buy (sell) orders tend to follow other aggressive buy (sell) orders and occur when bid–ask spreads are narrow and depth on the same (opposite) side of the limit book is large (small). Aggressive buys are more likely than sells to be motivated by information.

The ‘new issues puzzle’ is that stocks of common stock issuers subsequently underperform nonissuers matched on size and book-to-market ratio. With 7000+ seasoned equity and debt issues, we document that issuer underperformance reflects lower systematic risk exposure for issuing firms relative to the matches. A consistent explanation is that, as equity issuers lower leverage, their exposures to unexpected inflation and default risks decrease, thus decreasing their stocks’ expected returns relative to matched firms. Equity issues also significantly increase stock liquidity (turnover), again lowering expected returns relative to nonissuers. We conclude that the ‘new issue puzzle’ is explained by a failure of the matched-firm technique to provide a proper control for risk. This conclusion is robust to issue characteristics and the choice of factor model framework.