Share prices generally fall when a firm announces a seasoned equity offering (SEO). A standard explanation is that an SEO communicates negative information to investors. We show that if repeated capital market transactions are possible, this same asymmetry of information between firms and investors implies that some firms also repurchase shares in equilibrium. A subset of these firms directly profit from repurchases, while other firms repurchase in order to improve the terms of a subsequent SEO. The possibility of repurchases reduces both SEOs and investment. Overall, our analysis highlights the importance of analyzing SEOs and repurchases in a unified framework.

[We develop a theory of multiperiod debt structure. A simple trade-off between the termination threat required to make debt repayments incentive compatible and the desire to avoid early liquidation determines the number of repayments, their timing, and amounts. As firms increase their borrowing, they add periodic risky repayments from the back of the maturity structure, with the time between repayments increasing in cash-flow risk. Cash-flow growth or a significant risk-free cash-flow component limits the number of risky repayments. Firms with a significant risk-free cash-flow component choose dispersed maturity profiles with smaller, relatively safe repayments every period, rather than riskier periodic repayments.]

Many regulations aim to promote coordination among creditors in bankruptcy by ex post restricting their ability to exit distressed firms. However, such restrictions may harm creditors’ ex ante incentives to stay invested, thereby worsening coordination outcomes. We build a dynamic coordination model to show how this force shapes creditor runs, bankruptcy filings, and regulation designs. Intriguingly, filing for bankruptcy early, thereby preserving more assets for latecomers, can prolong firm life. Furthermore, regulators’ clawbacks on prebankruptcy repayments can be superior to firms’ commitment to early bankruptcy filing. Our analysis generates implications for automatic stay, avoidable preference, bank failures, and seniority structure.

Association, for some very helpful comments. Any errors are our own. Share prices generally fall when a firm announces a seasoned equity offering (SEO). A stan-dard explanation of this fact is that an SEO communicates negative information to investors. We show that if repeated capital market transactions are possible, this same asymmetry of information between firms and investors implies that some firms also repurchase shares in equilibrium. A subset of these firms directly profit from the repurchase transaction, while other firms repurchase in order to improve the terms of a subsequent SEO. The possibil-ity of repurchases reduces both SEOs and investment. Overall, our analysis highlights the importance of analyzing SEOs and repurchases in a unified framework. Share prices generally fall in response to a firm’s announcement of a seasoned equity offering (SEO).1 The standard explanation for this empirical regularity is that a firm has information that investors lack, and a SEO reveals to investors that the firm’s information is negative (see, in particular, Myers and Majluf (1984)). In equilibrium firms with negative information issue equity, and accept the negative share price response because the SEO

We develop a theory of multiperiod debt structure. A simple trade-off between the termination threat required to make debt repayments incentive compatible and the desire to avoid early liquidation determines the number of repayments, their timing, and amounts. As firms increase their borrowing, they add periodic risky repayments from the back of the maturity structure, with the time between repayments increasing in cash-flow risk. Cash-flow growth or a significant risk-free cash-flow component limits the number of risky repayments. Firms with a significant risk-free cash-flow component choose dispersed maturity profiles with smaller, relatively safe repayments every period, rather than riskier periodic repayments. Received May 31, 2017; editorial decision October 8, 2018 by Editor Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh.