This article examines the use of foreign currency derivatives (FCDs) in a sample of 720 large U.S. nonfinancial firms between 1990 and 1995 and its potential impact on firm value. Using Tobin's Q as a proxy for firm value, we find a positive relation between firm value and the use of FCDs. The hedging premium is statistically and economically significant for firms with exposure to exchange rates and is on average 4.87% of firm value. We also find some evidence consistent with the hypothesis that hedging causes an increase in firm value.

We use a regulatory experiment (Regulation SHO) that relaxes short-selling constraints on a random sample of U.S. stocks to test whether capital market frictions have an effect on stock prices and corporate decisions. We find that an increase in short-selling activity causes prices to fall, and that small firms react to these lower prices by reducing equity issues and investment. These results not only provide evidence that short-selling constraints affect asset prices, but also confirm that short-selling activity has a causal impact on financing and investment decisions.

We provide empirical evidence that a firm's overall visibility with investors, as measured by its product market advertising, has important consequences for the stock market. Specifically we show that firms with greater advertising expenditures, ceteris paribus, have a larger number of both individual and institutional investors, and better liquidity of their common stock. Our findings are robust to a variety of methodological approaches and to various measures of liquidity. These results suggest that the investors' degree of familiarity with a firm may affect its cost of capital and consequently its value.

We show that higher institutional ownership causes firms to pay more dividends. Our identification relies on a discontinuity in ownership around Russell index thresholds. Our estimates indicate that a one-percentage-point increase in institutional ownership causes a $7 million (8%) increase in dividends. We also find differences in shareholder proposals and voting patterns that suggest that even nonactivist institutions play an important role in monitoring firm behavior. The effect of institutional ownership on dividends is stronger for firms with higher expected agency costs.

This paper examines the effect of recent market reforms on the competitive structure of the Nasdaq. Our results show that changes in inventory and information costs cannot explain the post‐reform decrease in bid‐ask spreads. We interpret this as evidence that the reforms have reduced Nasdaq dealers' rents. Additionally, we find that the difference between NYSE and Nasdaq spreads have been greatly diminished with the new rules. Further, the reforms have resulted in an exit, ceteris paribus , from the industry for market making. Overall, our results provide strong evidence that the reforms have improved competition on the Nasdaq.

This article examines the use of foreign currency derivatives (FCDs) in a sample of 720 large U.S. nonfinancial firms between 1990 and 1995 and its potential impact on firm value. Using Tobin’s Q as a proxy for firm value, we find a positive relation between firm value and the use of FCDs. The hedging premium is statistically and economically significant for firms with exposure to exchange rates and is on average 4.87% of firm value. We also find some evidence consistent with the hypothesis that hedging causes an increase in firm value.

Dividends are clustered in increments of 5, such as 25, 50, and 75. Firms that gravitate towards these ‘prominent’ amounts have lower operating performance and lower annual five-factor alphas of 77 b.p. Consistent with agency frictions that lead to lazy decisions, clustering effects are stronger for entrenched firms, with more market power, and less shareholder activism. Dividend increases also cluster more than cuts, consistent with saliency bias. In a counterfactual exercise, we find no similar patterns in a sample of ADRs. Our results complement a number of recent studies showing the economic importance of simple decision heuristics.

We test the hypothesis that investment banking networks affect stock prices and trading behavior. Consistent with the notion that investment banks serve as information hubs for segmented groups of investors, the stock prices of firms that use the same lead underwriter during their equity offerings tend to move together. We also find that when firms switch underwriters between their initial public offering (IPO) and a seasoned equity offering (SEO), they comove less with the stocks associated with the old bank and more with the stocks associated with the new bank. This change in comovement is greater for stocks completing their first SEO and for those experiencing large changes in institutional ownership.

We use a regulatory experiment (Regulation SHO) that relaxes short-selling constraints on a random sample of U.S. stocks to test whether capital market frictions have an effect on stock prices and corporate decisions. We find that an increase in short-selling activity causes prices to fall, and that small firms react to these lower prices by reducing equity issues and investment. These results not only provide evidence that short-selling constraints affect asset prices, but also confirm that short-selling activity has a causal impact on financing and investment decisions.

We provide empirical evidence that a firm's overall visibility with investors, as measured by its product market advertising, has important consequences for the stock market. Specifically we show that firms with greater advertising expenditures, ceteris paribus, have a larger number of both individual and institutional investors, and better liquidity of their common stock. Our findings are robust to a variety of methodological approaches and to various measures of liquidity. These results suggest that the investors' degree of familiarity with a firm may affect its cost of capital and consequently its value.