Knowledge that Transforms

The empirical relationship between earnings' yield, firm size and returns on the common stock of NYSE firms is examined in this paper. The results confirm that the common stock of high E/P firms earn, on average, higher risk-adjusted returns than the common stock of low E/P firms and that this effect is clearly significant even if experimental control is exercised over differences in firm size. On the other hand, while the common stock of small NYSE firms appear to have earned substantially higher returns than the common stock of large NYSE firms, the size effect virtually disappears when returns are controlled for differences in risk and E/P ratios. The evidence presented here indicates that the E/P effect, however, is not entirely independent of firm size and that the effect of both variables on expected returns is considerably more complicated than previously documented in the literature.

We examine security price reactions around the announcements of 123 voluntary spin-offs by 116 firms between 1963 and 1981 involving a pro-rata distribution of the common stock of a subsidiary to the stockholders of the parent firm. The median spin-off in the sample is 6.6% of the original equity value and is associated with an abnormal return of 7.0% from 50 days prior to the announcement through completion of the spin-off. No evidence is found to indicate the gains to stockholders represent wealth transfers from senior securityholders. Over the entire event period we find positive gains for firms engaging in spin-offs to facilitate mergers or to separate diverse operating units but negative returns to firms responding to legal and/or regulatory difficulties. In the two-day interval surrounding the first press announcement we find positive average excess returns for all groups.

This paper demonstrates that warrant valuation and exercise strategy differ fundamentally from call option valuation. Simultaneous exercise of warrants is shown to be suboptimal and a monopolist owning all warrants can achieve a higher value. Unless warrants are perfectly divisible, no satisfactory equilibrium exists for the valuation and exercise of widely held warrants. The problems encountered appear to be quite general and stem from necessary assumptions about future corporate dividend policy and capital structure. Such assumptions are necessary for any model of corporate security valuation.

Small firms experience large returns in January and exceptionally large returns during the first few trading days of January. The empirical tests indicate that the abnormally high returns witnessed at the very beginning of January appear to be consistent with tax-loss selling. However, tax-loss selling cannot explain the entire January seasonal effect. The small firms least likely to be sold for tax reasons (prior year ‘winners’) also exhibit large average January returns, although not unusually large returns during the first few days of January.

This paper examines a sample of firms experiencing proxy contests for seats on their board of directors. Dissident shareholders usually fail to obtain a majority of board seats. Nevertheless, they capture some seats, via mechanisms such as cumulative voting, in over half of the sample contests. Regardless of proxy contest outcome, positive and statistically significant share price performance is associated with the contest. That finding is predicted by the standard economic analysis of proxy contests, in which the challenges benefit shareholders by improving corporate performance. The finding runs counter to the claim of Berle (1962) that the economists' view of proxy contests is ‘a wholly imaginary picture’. A portion of the positive share price changes taking place in the early stages of some proxy contests is not permanent, however, and as suggested by Manne (1962) is at least partially attributable to temporary increases in the market value of the vote attached to corporate shares.

This paper presents tests of the hypothesis that the relief imposed in antimerger cases is costly for defendant firms' stockholders. Previous research on this subject suggests that defendants' case-related losses are due entirely to legal expenses and the disruption of productive activity. In this paper it is shown that two out of five portfolios of defendant firms earn abnormal losses when final decisions in antimerger cases are announced. These losses are consistent with the imposition of costly constraints on some defendants by government antitrust enforcers. The tests also show that when acquisitions are canceled following antimerger complaints, the losses to the target firms are substantial and completely offset the gains generated when the acquisitions are proposed.

The traditional analysis of the relative pricing of tax-exempt and taxable debt is a habitat theory of the term structure of interest rates. In the traditional analysis the preferences of investors for particular maturities of debt lead to unique pricing relations at every point on the yield curve which are indicative of investor marginal tax brackets. Recent work by Fama (1977) suggests that banks are potential arbitrageurs across tax-exempt and taxable bond markets which force a particular equilibrium on the pricing of short-term bonds. Miller (1977) suggests that the choice of debt or equity financing by firms in the aggregate forces a similar equilibrium on the pricing of all tax-exempt and taxable bonds. This paper exploits the institution of Regulation Q and its effects on the banking system to bring evidence to bear on the predictions of these three models.

Pre-emptive rights allow existing shareholders to purchase a new offering of shares before the general public. This paper investigates the effect on shareholder wealth of removing pre-emptive rights from corporate charters. Two hypotheses are constrasted: (1) Shareholder wealth maximization suggests that management uses this extra degree of freedom to pick the least cost method for raising new equity; hence, the amendment increases shareholder wealth. (2) Management welfare maximization holds that management will use the passage of the amendment to maximize their own welfare, sometimes to the detriment of shareholders; hence, the amendment decreases shareholder wealth. The evidence indicates that the amendment decreases shareholder wealth.

This paper describes the relation among a variety of asset leasing contracts, including: (1) cancellable operating leases; (2) leases which grant the lesse an option to extend the life of the lease; (3) leases that grant the lessee an option to purchase the leased asset at a fixed price at the maturity date of the lease; (4) leases that grant the lessee the right to purchase the leased asset at its ‘fair market value’ at the maturity date of the lease; (5) leases that grant an option to the lessee to purchase the leased asset at a prespecified price anytime during the life of the lease; (6) leases that require the lessee to purchase the leased asset at a fixed price at the maturity date of the lease; and (7) leases that contain non-cancellation provisions. The paper uses a compound option pricing framework to develop a general model for valuing (or evaluating) each of the types of leasing contracts. Numerical examples are presented to illustrate the effect of the various elements of a leasing contract — including cancellation risk and residual value risk — on equilibrium rental payments.

This paper examines common stock returns and dividend and earnings patterns surrounding specially designated dividends labeled by management as ‘extra’, ‘special’ or ‘year-end’ and compares them to those surrounding regular (unlabeled) dividend increases. The results support the notion that management uses the labeling of dividend increases to convey information to the market about the future potential of the firm. Unlabeled increases appear to contain the most positive information. Contrary to the sometimes suggested view, specially designated dividends appear to convey positive information about future dividends and earnings beyond that relating to the current period.