Many classes of microstructure models, as well as intuition, suggest that it should be easier to trade when markets are more active. In the data, however, volume and liquidity seem unrelated over time. This paper offers an explanation for this fact based on a simple frictionless model in which liquidity reflects the average risk-bearing capacity of the economy and volume reflects the changing contribution of individuals to that average. Volume and liquidity are unrelated in the model, but volume is positively related to the variance of liquidity, or liquidity risk. Empirical evidence from the U.S. government bond and stock markets supports this new prediction.

Defenders of market efficiency argue that anomalies involving long-term abnormal returns are not robust to alternative methodologies. We argue that because various methodologies use different weighting schemes, the magnitude of abnormal returns should differ, and in a predictable manner. Three problems are identified that cause low power in value-weighted three-factor time series regressions when abnormal returns following managerial actions are being estimated. We illustrate the sensitivities in the context of the new issues puzzle as well as with simulations. More generally, multifactor models as currently used do not, and cannot, test market efficiency.

We examine the determinants and implications of holdings of cash and marketable securities by publicly traded U.S. firms in the 1971–1994 period. In time-series and cross-section tests, we find evidence supportive of a static tradeoff model of cash holdings. In particular, firms with strong growth opportunities and riskier cash flows hold relatively high ratios of cash to total non-cash assets. Firms that have the greatest access to the capital markets, such as large firms and those with high credit ratings, tend to hold lower ratios of cash to total non-cash assets. At the same time, however, we find evidence that firms that do well tend to accumulate more cash than predicted by the static tradeoff model where managers maximize shareholder wealth. There is little evidence that excess cash has a large short-run impact on capital expenditures, acquisition spending, and payouts to shareholders. The main reason that firms experience large changes in excess cash is the occurrence of operating losses.

This paper uses commercial aircraft transactions to determine whether prices obtained from asset sales are greater under Chapter 11 reorganization than under Chapter 7 liquidation. Results indicate that prices obtained under both bankruptcy regimes are substantially lower than prices obtained by non-distressed airlines. Furthermore, there is no evidence that prices obtained by firms reorganizing under Chapter 11 are greater than those obtained by firms liquidating under Chapter 7. An analysis of aircraft sales indicates that Chapter 11 is also ineffective in limiting the number of aircraft sold at discounted prices.

In this paper we examine tender offer share repurchases to differentiate between the information signaling and free cash flow hypotheses. Previous work in this area has focused on announcement period returns. While we also examine announcement returns, our primary emphasis is on operating performance changes surrounding repurchases. We argue that the information contained in changes in operating performance, and its determinants, enables us to differentiate between the two hypotheses. Our primary finding is that operating performance following repurchases improves only in low-growth firms, and that these gains are generated by more efficient utilization of assets, and asset sales, rather than improved growth opportunities. Thus, repurchases do not appear to be pure financial transactions meant to change the firm's capital structure but are part of a restructuring package meant to shrink the assets of the firm. This evidence leads us to conclude that the positive investor reaction to repurchases is best explained by the free cash flow hypothesis.

This study focuses on electric utilities in the United States to consider two related issues. First, the study tests for asymmetric price reactions to positive and negative earnings surprises (ES). Second, the study associates policy differences across jurisdictions with variations in the cash flow effects of positive and negative ES and then uses the framework to consider variations in price responses across regulatory climates. In the same context, the study investigates the effects of a utility's abnormal profits on the asymmetry of price reactions to positve and negative ES. The empirical predictions are motivated by the disparity between the principles and practices that underlie cost recovery for the utilities and the uneven effects of the cost‐recovery practies on the cash flows associated with positve and negative ES. The results show that the sign of ES and the climate in which a utility operates are related to the size of price reactions to ES. Furthermore, a utility's abnormal profit status has significant effects on the size of price reactions to ES. Only a modest price response asymmetry is indicated for manufacturing firms.

Electric utilities in the United States are subject to a cost‐plus normal profits pricing that is designed to align the market value of equity with the balance sheet book value. Perfect alignment implies the equality of the market and book values. Extant empirical evidence suggests that, for these utilities, actual cost/profit recovery does not follow a pure cost‐plus pricing, raising the prospect that income statement items contribute to the determination of market value. What is not obvious is the extent to which the noted departure from pure cost‐plus pricing results in misalignment of the market and book values, or the relative contribution of income statement items to the valuation of electric utility shares. This study pursues this question, using benchmark results for a sample of manufacturing firms to highlight the degree of market‐to‐book alignment for regulated and competitive firms. The results show a considerable alignment of the market and book values for utilities. In examining the relevance of book value and income statement items in the determination of market value, it is found that the contribution of earnings level to explaining market value diminishes markedly in the presence of book value for electric utilities, and the contribution of earnings change to explaining returns diminishes markedly in the presence of earnings levels. Earnings level complements book value in explaining market value for manufacturing firms, while earnings change complements earnings level in explaining returns. The results further show that the market and accounting values exhibit pronounced misalignments in returns‐earnings models, especially for utilities.

Prior studies on the firm size effect either do not adequately control for earnings or ignore the potential implication of earnings news for the firm size effect. Thus, they implicitly assume that the firm size effect is identical across all firms irrespective of earnings news. This study provides additional empirical evidence on the firm size effect by taking earnings news into account. The results indicate that the firm size effect persists even when earnings news, measured by the sign and magnitude of unexpected earnings, is controlled. The firm size effect, however, is pronounced only for firms with “good” earnings news, but not for firms with “bad” earnings news. Possible implications of these findings are explored. Résumé. Les études qui ont été réalisées jusqu'à maintenant sur l'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise ne contrôlent pas adéquatement la variable bénéfices ou ignorent les conséquences potentielles de l'information relative aux bénéfices sur l'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise. Elles supposent donc implicitement que l'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise est la même pour toutes les entreprises, peu importe l'information relative aux bénéfices. La présente étude ajoute aux preuves empiriques concernant l'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise, en tenant compte de l'inforrmation relative aux bénéfices. Les résultats de cette étude révèlent que l'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise persiste, même lorsque l'information relative aux bénéfices, mesurée en fonction de l'indication de bénéfices imprévus et de leur ampleur, est contrôlée. L'incidence de la taille de l'entreprise est toutefois marquée seulement dans le cas des entreprises pour lesquelles l'information relative aux bénéfices est « positive », et non dans le cas des entreprises pour lesquelles l'information relative aux bénéfices est « négative ». L'auteur explore les conséquences possibles des résultats de l'étude.