Analysis of 60 proxy contests for seats on the boards of exchange-listed firms during 1978–1985 shows that three years after the contest less than one-fifth of the sample firms remain independent, publicly held corporations run by the same management team. Proxy contests are typically followed by managerial resignations, even when dissidents fail to obtain a majority of board seats, and are often followed by sale or liquidation of the firm. The average stockholder wealth gains associated with proxy contests are largely attributable to gains by companies in which dissident activity leads to sale or liquidation.

Managers of firms with dual classes of common stock can choose different quantities of votes for a given cash flow interest by choosing different quantities of the two securities. We study managerial stock holdings in 45 dual class firms and find that vote ownership per se is an important motivation for these holdings in that corporate officers and their families hold a median 56.9% of the votes and 24.0% of the common stock cash flows. We also find significant family involvement in many sample firms, and document four case studies in which explicit acquisition premiums were paid for superior voting shares.

This paper presents evidence that stockholder wealth declines on average when managers respond to attempted hostile takeovers with defensive changes in asset and ownership structure. The data also indicate that these corporate restructurings are typically quite large and that many are attempts by managers to create barriers specific to the hostile bidder and /or to consolidate a block of voting securities in the hands of management allies. The evidence suggests that defensive motives (whether beneficial or harmful) influence corporate asset and ownership structure.

Standstill agreements are voluntary contracts which limit a substantial stockholder's ownership interest in a corporation for a specified number of years. They are often accompanied by repurchase of the substantial stockholder's shares at a premium above the market price. Standstills and premium buybacks reduce competition for corporate control and provide differential treatment of large block stockholders. The analysis indicates a statistically significant negative average effect on non-participating stockholder wealth associated with standstill agreements. Negotiated premium repurchases are also associated with negative, but less significant, stockholder returns. The evidence is inconsistent with the hypothesis that these management actions are in the best interests of non-participating stockholders.

Many large corporations have recently adopted antitakeover charter amendments which make the transfer of corporate control more difficult. This paper develops and tests competing theoretical explanations for the passage of these amendments. In one view, antitakeover provisions are adopted because incumbent management seeks job protection at stockholders' expense. The alternative hypothesis is that antitakeover provisions benefit stockholders, perhaps by extracting greater payment in exchange for corporate control. Although inconclusive, the evidence provides weak preliminary support for the hypothesis that antitakeover amendments are best explained as a device for managerial entrenchment.

An annual loss is essentially a necessary condition for dividend reductions in firms with established earnings and dividend records: 50.9 percent of 167 NYSE firms with losses during 1980-85 reduced dividends, versus 1.0 percent of 440 firms without losses. As hypothesized by Merton H. Miller and Franco Modigliani, dividend reductions depend on whether earnings include unusual items that are likely to temporarily depress income. Dividend reductions are more likely given greater current losses, less negative unusual items, and more persistent earnings difficulties. Dividend policy has information content in that knowledge that a firm has reduced dividends improves the ability of current earnings to predict future earnings.

ABSTRACT Leverage cross‐sections more than a few years apart differ markedly, with similarities evaporating as the time between them lengthens. Many firms have high and low leverage at different times, but few keep debt‐to‐assets ratios consistently above 0.500. Capital structure stability is the exception, not the rule, occurs primarily at low leverage, and is virtually always temporary, with many firms abandoning low leverage during the post‐war boom. Industry‐median leverage varies widely over time. Target‐leverage models that place little or no weight on maintaining a particular ratio do a good job replicating the substantial instability of the actual leverage cross‐section.

This paper studies the dividend policy adjustments of 80 NYSE firms to protracted financial distress as evidenced by multiple losses during 1980–1985. Almost all sample firms reduced dividends, and more than half apparently faced binding debt covenants in years they did so. Absent binding debt covenants, dividends are cut more often than omitted, suggesting that managerial reluctance is to the omission and not simply the reduction of dividends. Moreover, managers of firms with long dividend histories appear particularly reluctant to omit dividends. Finally, some dividend reductions seem strategically motivated, e.g., designed to enhance the firm's bargaining position with organized labor.

ABSTRACT This paper studies the dividend policy adjustments of 80 NYSE firms to protracted financial distress as evidenced by multiple losses during 1980–1985. Almost all sample firms reduced dividends, and more than half apparently faced binding debt covenants in years they did so. Absent binding debt covenants, dividends are cut more often than omitted, suggesting that managerial reluctance is to the omission and not simply the reduction of dividends. Moreover, managers of firms with long dividend histories appear particularly reluctant to omit dividends. Finally, some dividend reductions seem strategically motivated, e.g., designed to enhance the firm's bargaining position with organized labor.

In May 1991, one month after seizing Executive Life, California regulators seized First Capital Life (FCLIC). Both insurers were Drexel clients with large junk bond holdings, and both had experienced ‘bank runs’. FCLIC's run followed regulators' televised comments that its poor condition necessitated a substantial cash infusion. Yet FCLIC's statutory capital — with junk bonds, real estate, and mortgages marked to market — was far from lowest among major insurers with California policyholders. It becomes lowest if junk bonds alone are marked to market at year-end 1990 (ignoring larger market declines in real estate/mortgages and the junk bond market's 21% return in early 1991). Our findings suggest a regulatory bias against junk bonds in the political backlash against the 1980s.