This study empirically examines the role of shocks to macro-uncertainty in shaping the responses of stock market participants to firm-specific earnings news. Specifically, I find that investors place greater weight on bad news following an increase in macro-uncertainty. By contrast, I find that investors place equal weight on both good and bad news following a decrease in macro-uncertainty. Furthermore, my findings show that these effects are more pronounced (1) for firms whose prior returns are more correlated with macro-uncertainty, (2) for firms that experience abnormally low trading volume during the earnings announcement, (3) for firms with relatively lower levels of institutional ownership, and (4) for firms with relatively higher information uncertainty. In sum, these findings provide novel empirical evidence that investors behave in a manner consistent with ambiguity aversion, with the effects strongest among unsophisticated investors.

Regulation is often proposed, developed, and finalized over a lengthy rule-making period prior to its adoption. We examine the period over which banking authorities discussed, adopted, and implemented Basel III to understand how firms respond to proposed regulation. We find evidence to suggest that affected banks not only lobbied rule-makers against it but also made strategic financial reporting changes and altered their business models in ways that reduced their exposure to the proposed rule prior to rule-makers finalizing the regulation. Further, our results indicate a sequential response, with banks responding through lobbying and strategic financial reporting prior to making business model changes. These findings highlight the interplay among firms’ financial reporting, business model, and political choices in response to proposed regulation and indicate that the appropriate date for an event study may be the regulation’s announcement date rather than its adoption or implementation dates.

We examine the role of investor relations (IR) in private debt markets. We find that firms with dedicated IR officers (IROs) receive significantly lower loan spreads, particularly when lenders require a better understanding of the borrower’s risk profile. Among firms with IROs, those with longer tenured officers experience lower spreads, especially when IROs also manage financial responsibilities. To address endogeneity concerns, we demonstrate that loan spreads decline when a firm establishes an IR program and rise when the program is discontinued. Furthermore, when a different individual assumes the IRO role, loan spreads increase, even though there are no reductions in firm disclosure. Loans issued to firms with IROs also have shorter syndication duration, attract more nonrelationship, foreign, and nonbank participant lenders, feature more customized covenants, and are less likely to undergo renegotiation. Overall, our study provides robust evidence of the relevance of IR in private debt markets.

We examine how personal lending relationships between lenders and managers are affected by information and accounting environments of borrowing firms. We address this question by exploring whether, following managerial turnover, lenders migrate with the manager from the firm where a relationship developed (origin firm) to the manager's new firm (destination firm). We find that the opacity of the external information environment of the destination firm significantly increases the probability of lenders' co-migration, while accounting irregularities at both the destination and origin firms decrease it. We also show that co-migration is affected by a lender's monitoring efficiency. A lender's monitoring efficiency increases its co-migration probability when a manager moves to an opaque firm, but not when she moves to a transparent one. When the destination or origin firm experiences accounting irregularities, even lenders with strong monitoring capabilities are mostly reluctant to continue their relationship with a migrating manager.