We examine share-price reactions of commercial bank common stock issues and find negative effects on rival commercial and investment banking firms. In comparison, we find no such intra-industry effects for equity issues by industrial firms. Our results support theoretical models in which bank loan portfolios impound asymmetric information about client firms, so that adverse individual bank announcements generate external information effects on other banks. A policy implication of these results is that regulatory pressures applied to individual banks induce spillover costs for the commercial and investment banking industries. Our evidence also indicates that the legal separation of commercial and investment banking activities is artificial.

We analyze intercorporate asset sales where equity is the means of payment, and compare the results to cash asset sales. Equity deals are value‐enhancing for both buyers, 10%, and sellers, 3%, while cash sales generate seller returns of 1.9% and buyer returns that are not significant. Combined wealth gains are large for equity deals, but modest for cash deals. Equity‐based asset sales are not a precursor to consolidations between buyers and sellers, and do not affect buyer openness to the takeover market. We conclude that the use of buyer equity conveys favorable information about the value of assets and buyers.

We examine the value of bank durability to borrowing firms. The analysis is based on theoretical models of the asset services view of intermediation which imply that private information and associated relationship‐specific activities are intrinsic to bank lending. We analyze share price effects on firms with lending relationships with Continental Illinois Bank during its de facto failure and subsequent FDIC rescue. We find the bank's impending insolvency had negative effects and the FDIC rescue positive effects on client firm share prices. We conclude that borrowers incur significant costs in response to unanticipated reductions in bank durability and thus are bank stakeholders.

In this paper, we examine the market valuation effects of corporate sale‐and‐leasebacks. Specifically, we test whether such transactions offer a net benefit to lessees or lessors by evaluating the impact on share prices from announcements of sale‐and‐leasebacks of major corporate assets. Our evidence indicates that the announcements are associated with positive abnormal returns to lessees. We conclude that this positive market reaction results from an overall reduction in the present value of expected taxes occasioned by the transactions. Our evidence also suggests that the gains from sale‐and‐leasebacks accrue solely to lessee firms.