During the 1980s, insolvency of individual thrifts and the thrift deposit insurer created severe incentive problems. Lacking cash to close insolvent thrifts, regulators induced nearly $10 billion of private capital to flow into the industry through mutual-to-stock conversions. We test a theory of how regulators encouraged capital-impaired mutual thrifts to convert by permitting them to pay dividends rather than rebuild capital. We estimate the costs of this policy and interpret the 1991 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act as requiring regulators to impose restraints on depository institutions parallel to debt covenants that prevent capital distributions by nonfinancial firms experiencing distress.

ABSTRACT During the 1980s, insolvency of individual thrifts and the thrift deposit insurer created severe incentive problems. Lacking cash to close insolvent thrifts, regulators induced nearly $10 billion of private capital to flow into the industry through mutual‐to‐stock conversions. We test a theory of how regulators encouraged capital‐impaired mutual thrifts to convert by permitting them to pay dividends rather than rebuild capital. We estimate the costs of this policy and interpret the 1991 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act as requiring regulators to impose restraints on depository institutions parallel to debt covenants that prevent capital distributions by nonfinancial firms experiencing distress.

We analyse both initial underpricing and post-listing returns for Australian IPOs. Our results are consistent with the view that unique institutional characteristics may have overwhelmed previous Australian tests of equilibrium models of IPO underpricing. The results also show that Australian IPOs significantly underperform market movements in the three-year period subsequent to listing. Further investigation of these anomalous post-listing returns lead us to reject various ‘speculative bubble’ explanations. Rather, the evidence suggests a curvilinear relationship between initial and subsequent returns, although the economic significance of the relationship is low.

Local opposition to many projects makes it increasingly difficult to find sites for socially desirable facilities. As has been widely documented, compensation for local disamenities does not increase the level of support. An empirical analysis of the Swiss search for a nuclear waste repository even reveals decreased acceptance due to the rejection of bribes and the crowding-out of public spirit. However, a "compensation cycle" may be exploited to finally win the support of host communities. As siting issues are decided in the realm of politics, an economic theory of compensation must focus on the interplay between morals and markets.