An arbitrageur with short investment horizon gains from accelerating price discovery by advertising his private information. However, advertising many assets may overload investors’ attention, reducing the number of informed traders per asset, and slowing price discovery. So the arbitrageur optimally concentrates advertising on just a few assets, unless his trades have significant price impact. The arbitrageur’s gain from advertising is increasing in the assets’ mispricing and in the precision of his private information, and is decreasing in its complexity. If several arbitrageurs have private information, inefficient equilibria can arise, where substantial mispricing persists or investors’ attention is overloaded.

Using novel monthly data for 226 euro-area banks from 2007 to 2015, we investigate the determinants of banks’ sovereign exposures and their effects on lending during and after the crisis. Public, bailed-out and poorly capitalized banks responded to sovereign stress by purchasing domestic public debt more than other banks, consistent with both the “moral suasion” and the “carry trade” hypothesis. Public banks’ purchases grew especially in coincidence with the largest ECB liquidity injections, which therefore reinforced the “moral suasion” mechanism. Bank exposures significantly amplified the impact of sovereign stress on bank lending to domestic firms, as well as on lending by foreign subsidiaries of stressed-country banks to firms in non-stressed countries. Altogether, our evidence connects this amplification effect and its cross-border transmission to the moral suasion exerted by domestic governments on banks during the crisis.

Most regulators around the world reacted to the 2007–09 crisis by imposing bans on short selling. These were imposed and lifted at different dates in different countries, often targeted different sets of stocks, and featured varying degrees of stringency. We exploit this variation in short‐sales regimes to identify their effects on liquidity, price discovery, and stock prices. Using panel and matching techniques, we find that bans (i) were detrimental for liquidity, especially for stocks with small capitalization and no listed options; (ii) slowed price discovery, especially in bear markets, and (iii) failed to support prices, except possibly for U.S. financial stocks.

Firms may pursue non-meritocratic promotion policies at the cost of lower profitability, if they yield private benefits of control. Corporate governance standards that limit these private benefits favor meritocratic promotions and therefore encourage workers’ skill acquisition. Managerial incentive pay has ambiguous effects on workers’ skill acquisition: it fosters the supply of skilled labor, while reducing firms’ willingness to promote skilled workers to managerial positions. Social welfare increases with the share of meritocratic firms, but not necessarily with governance standards: small reforms generate losers and gainers, and may on balance lower welfare, while drastic enough reforms can generate Pareto improvements.

We are delighted to announce that the winner of the 2010 Deutsche Bank Best Paper Award is: “Corporate Governance Externalities” by Viral Acharya and Paolo Volpin which appeared in issue 1 of Volume 14 and was voted by the editorial board as the best article published in the last four issues of the Review of Finance. The two runners-up for the award were: “Determinants of Sovereign Risk: Macroeconomic Fundamentals and the Pricing of Sovereign Debt” by Jens Hilscher and Yves Nosbusch and “The Limits of the Limits of Arbitrage” by Alon Brav, J.B. Heaton and Si Li The awards were presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the European Finance Association in Frankfurt on August 27th. We are grateful to the Deutsche Bank Foundation for sponsoring this award.

Local companies attract significantly more attention from investors than nonlocal companies, especially at times of news releases and high volatility. This attention gap widens especially when news is firm-specific rather than aggregate, and in response to idiosyncratic rather than market risk. Attention is causally related to perceived proximity: after a firm is acquired by a nonlocal one, local investors, compared with nonlocal investors, are more likely to reallocate attention away from it; conversely, COVID-19 travel restrictions led investors to reallocate attention toward local companies and away from nonlocal ones, especially those difficult to reach. Finally, local attention predicts volatility, bid-ask spreads, and nonlocal attention, but not vice versa. Our findings suggest that the geography of attention matters and is shaped by local investors’ information-processing advantage, not familiarity bias.

We analyze the political determinants of investor and employment protection. Our model predicts that proportional electoral systems are conducive to weaker investor protection and stronger employment protection than majoritarian systems. This prediction is consistent with international panel data evidence. The proportionality of the voting system is significantly and negatively correlated with shareholder protection in a panel of 45 countries, and positively correlated with employment protection in a panel of 21 OECD countries. Other political variables also affect regulatory outcomes, especially for the labor market. The origin of the legal system has some additional explanatory power only for employment protection.

We investigate whether information sharing among banks has affected credit market performance in the transition countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, using a large sample of firm-level data. Our estimates show that information sharing is associated with improved availability and lower cost of credit to firms. This correlation is stronger for opaque firms than transparent ones and stronger in countries with weak legal environments than in those with strong legal environments. In cross-sectional estimates, we control for variation in country-level aggregate variables that may affect credit, by examining the differential impact of information sharing across firm types. In panel estimates, we also control for the presence of unobserved heterogeneity at the firm level, as well as for changes in macroeconomic variables and the legal environment.

More transparent firms enjoy better access to finance, and also enable closer scrutiny by tax authorities and thus face a heavier tax burden, insofar as they are required to report the same data to tax authorities and investors (book-tax conformity). We study this trade-off in a model with distortionary taxes and finance rationing, and test its predictions on an international dataset. As predicted, firms facing low corporate tax rates choose high transparency, particularly if they are not very dependent on external funding. This result is confirmed by the evidence from statutory tax reforms: reductions of corporate tax rates are followed by increases in firm transparency. Moreover, firms choose higher transparency in countries with high audit quality. Investment is positively correlated with transparency, especially for firms more dependent on external finance. Results are stronger in countries with book-tax conformity.