When calling its convertible bonds, a company must typically give bondholders a notice period of about 30 days to decide whether to convert the bonds. This notice period affects the optimal call policy for convertible bonds. After accounting for the notice period, convertible bonds in our sample would have been optimally called when the stock was at about an 11% premium (median) relative to the conversion price. We show that after properly accounting for the call notice period and other factors, the median excess call premium is less than 4%—substantially less than the 26–44% call premium previous researchers have documented.

We study how heterogeneous beliefs affect returns and examine whether they are a priced factor in traditional asset pricing models. To accomplish this task, we suggest new empirical measures based on the disagreement among analysts about expected earnings (short-term and long-term) and show they are good proxies. We first establish that the heterogeneity of beliefs matters for asset pricing and then turn our attention to estimating a structural model in which we use the forecasts of financial analysts to proxy for agents' beliefs. Finally, we investigate whether the amount of heterogeneity in analysts' forecasts can help explain asset pricing puzzles.

Because a money manager learns more about her skill from her management experience than outsiders can learn from her realized returns, she expects inefficiency in future contracts that condition exclusively on realized returns. A fund family that learns what the manager learns can reduce this inefficiency cost if the family is large enough. The family's incentive is to retain any given manager regardless of her skill but, when the family has enough managers, it adds value by boosting the credibility of its retentions through the firing of others. As the number of managers grows, the efficiency loss goes to zero.

Recent efforts to restructure electricity markets have renewed interest in assessing how consumers respond to price changes. This paper develops a model for evaluating the effects of alternative tariff designs on electricity use. The model concurrently addresses several interrelated difficulties posed by nonlinear pricing, heterogeneity in consumer price sensitivity, and consumption aggregation over appliances and time. We estimate the model using extensive data for a representative sample of 1300 California households. The results imply a strikingly skewed distribution of household electricity price elasticities in the population, with a small fraction of households accounting for most aggregate demand response. We then estimate the aggregate and distributional consequences of recent tariff structure changes in California, the consumption effects of which have been the subject of considerable debate.

Using several benchmarks and operating performance measures, the results from this paper suggest that takeovers completed in the UK over the period 1985 to 1993 result in modest improvements in operating performance. Using a matching procedure similar to that employed by Loughran and Ritter [J. Finance 52 (1997) 1823], in which benchmark firms are selected on the basis of several pre-takeover characteristics, the median increase in post-takeover performance for acquiring firms ranges from 0.13% per annum to a statistically significant 1.78% per annum, depending on the definition of operating performance used and choice of deflator. Using the same matching scheme in a Healy et al. [J. Financ. Econ. 31 (1992) 135] methodology, in which post-takeover performance is regressed on a combined target and acquirer pre-takeover performance, reveals larger improvements in operating performance, ranging from 0.80% to a statistically significant 3.1%, again depending on the definition of operating performance employed and deflator chosen. While there is some evidence that factors such as industrial relatedness and the removal of the target CEO have an impact on post-takeover performance, method of payment is found to have an insignificant impact.

Gasoline taxes are widely perceived as the most efficient instrument for reducing gasoline consumption because they exploit all behavioral responses for reducing fuel use, including reduced driving and improved fuel economy. At present, however, higher fuel taxes are viewed as a political nonstarter. Pay-as-you-drive (PAYD) auto insurance, which involves replacing existing lump-sum premiums with premiums that vary in proportion to miles driven, should be more practical, since they do not raise driving costs for the average motorist. We show that when impacts on a broad range of motor vehicle externalities are considered, PAYD also induces significantly higher welfare gains than comparable gasoline tax increases, for fuel reductions below 9%. The reason is that under PAYD, all of the reduction in fuel use, rather than just a fraction, comes from reduced driving; this produces a substantial additional efficiency gain because mileage-related external costs (especially congestion and accidents) are relatively large in magnitude.(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

We present a simulation-based method for solving discrete-time portfolio choice problems involving non-standard preferences, a large number of assets with arbitrary return distribution, and, most importantly, a large number of state variables with potentially path-dependent or non-stationary dynamics. The method is flexible enough to accommodate intermediate consumption, portfolio constraints, parameter and model uncertainty, and learning. We first establish the properties of the method for the portfolio choice between a stock index and cash when the stock returns are either iid or predictable by the dividend yield. We then explore the problem of an investor who takes into account the predictability of returns but is uncertain about the parameters of the data generating process. The investor chooses the portfolio anticipating that future data realizations will contain useful information to learn about the true parameter values.

Abstract We demonstrate analytically and empirically that valuing a firm with foreign operations in the presence of exchange rate uncertainty requires information on the foreign operating cash flows disaggregated by currency and persistence. In particular, given consolidated earnings, investors need information on the exchange gain or loss on permanent foreign operating cash flows. We extend the model to show how the permanent foreign cash flows can be used to condition the change in the translation adjustment to make it value‐relevant; however, using the permanent foreign cash flows directly is superior for valuation purposes. The empirical tests support our hypothesis that the market response to exchange rate movements is sensitive to the relative magnitudes of revenues and costs denominated in each foreign currency in which a firm has transactions. Disclosure of cash flows by currency should enhance the valuation of firms with foreign operations.

In Search of the Holy Grail: Policy Convergence, Experimentation, and Economic Performance by Sharun W. Mukand and Dani Rodrik. Published in volume 95, issue 1, pages 374-383 of American Economic Review, March 2005