In April 1991, regulators seized the major subsidiaries of First Executive Corporation (FE), an insurer that invested heavily in junk bonds. During the junk bond market turmoil of 1989–1990, adverse publicity fueled a bank run at FE, forcing a $4 billion portfolio liquidation before the market rose 50–60% in 1991–1992. More traditional insurers did not receive commensurate press coverage, despite their substantial exposure to real estate declines, which were roughly 2.5 times the junk bond decline. Seizure of FE's subsidiaries was defensible, although FE would have become solvent within a year, given average junk bond market appreciation.

This study investigates the incentives of financially distressed firms to restructure their debt privately rather than through formal bankruptcy. In a sample of 169 financially distressed companies, about half successfully restructure their debt outside of Chapter 11. Firms more likely to restructure their debt privately have more intangible assets, owe more of their debt to banks, and owe fewer lenders. Analysis of stock returns suggests that the market is also able to discriminate ex ante between the two sets of firms, and that stockholders are systematically better off when debt is restructured privately.

This study compares the market value of firms that reorganize in bankruptcy with estimates of value based on management's published cash flow projections. We estimate firm values using models that have been shown in other contexts to generate relatively precise estimates of value. We find that these methods generally yield unbiased estimates of value, but the dispersion of valuation errors is very wide - the sample ratio of estimated value to market value varies from less than 20% to greater than 250%. Cross-sectional analysis indicates that the variation in these errors is related to empirical proxies for claimholders' incentives to overstate or understate the firm's value.

This paper examines whether firms emerging from conglomerate stock breakups are able to affect the types of financial analysts that cover their firms as well as the quality of information generated about their performance. Our sample comprises 103 focus‐increasing spin‐offs, equity carve‐outs, and targeted stock offerings between 1990 and 1995. We find that, after these transactions, sample firms experience a significant increase in coverage by analysts that specialize in subsidiary firms’ industries, and a 30–50% increase in analyst forecast accuracy for parent and subsidiary firms. The improvement in forecast accuracy is partially attributable to expanded disclosure. However, forecast improvements for specialists exceed those for non‐specialists, leading us to conclude that corporate focus can facilitate improved capital market intermediation by financial analysts with industry expertise.