[This paper examines cross-sectional differences in the optimistic behavior of financial analysts. Specifically, we investigate whether the predictive accuracy of past information (e.g., time-series of earnings, past returns, etc.) is associated with the magnitude of the bias in analysts' earnings forecasts. We posit that there is higher demand for non-public information for firms whose earnings are difficult to accurately predict than for firms whose earnings can be accurately forecasted using public information. Assuming that optimism facilitates access to management's non-public information, we hypothesize that analysts will issue more optimistic forecasts for low predictability firms than for high predictability firms. Our results support this hypothesis.]

A firm seeks to raise capital in credit markets to fund risky operating activities. The firm has private information about the future cash flows from such activities. Firm owners delegate operating decisions to a manager who privately learns further information about the distribution of those cash flows subsequent to contracting, but before taking actions. Those actions include the selection of which operating activities to pursue and how much hidden effort to exert. At issue initially after introducing the problem is the efficient design of the manager's compensation as a device for signaling private information to lenders as well as for inducing operating decisions. Our results provide conditions under which a Bayesian Nash separating equilibrium satisfying the Cho–Kreps intuitive criterion exists. Broadly speaking, these results suggest that contracts that resolve internal adverse selection and moral hazard problems may serve as signaling devices in efficiently resolving information asymmetries with external parties. Next, we show how earnings-based debt covenants and the selection of conservative accounting methods may eliminate signaling costs altogether.

This article studies contracts between a principal and an agent that are robust to information asymmetries about measurement quality. Our main result is that an information asymmetry about measurement quality not only reduces the usefulness of a given performance measure for stewardship purposes, it also qualitatively changes the way the performance measure is used if the information asymmetry is sufficiently large. We also study the manipulability of performance measures, assuming that poor measurement quality creates room for manipulation via selective (cherry‐picked) corrections by the agent. With known imperfect measurement quality, manipulability lowers the cost of providing incentives. Manipulability introduces overstatements only, while imperfect measurement introduces both overstatements and understatements. However, with an information asymmetry about measurement quality, manipulability can increase the cost of providing incentives, since there is now an induced information asymmetry about manipulability.

Asymmetric information between corporate insiders and other market participants can lead to large bid‐ask spreads or even a collapse of trade in financial markets. In this paper, we discuss how voluntary disclosure by insiders can remedy this problem. When insiders make disclosure decisions after they become informed, other market participants update their prior beliefs on the basis of both the information disclosed and the information not disclosed. Insiders then give up some or all of their information advantage to weakly increase their profits. These results do not rely on ex ante commitments on the part of the insiders.

Many recent empirical studies have concluded that analysts' earnings forecasts are optimistic on average. In this paper, we attempt to undo the effect of one potential source of optimistic bias in analysts' earnings forecasts. Assuming forecasts come from a truncated normal distribution, we estimate the “true” population mean using maximum likelihood. We find that our estimates of earnings are more accurate and less biased than standard measures of sample mean and median. However, we do not find a closer relationship between excess market returns and forecast errors from our maximum likelihood estimate than from the sample mean. This may suggest that the market does not fully incorporate analysts' incentives in generating expectations about future earnings.

We model an information mosaic in which multiple signals—one gathered by an informed trader and the other publicly disclosed by the manager of the firm—are combined to estimate firm value. Under testable conditions, voluntary disclosures lead to higher ex ante information asymmetry and expected profits for the informed trader by allowing him to refine his trading strategy and complete his information mosaic. The informed trader's ability to combine information and enhance his advantage is more prevalent when there is more uncertainty about whether the news is favorable or unfavorable, the manager is more likely to be informed, and the manager's information is precise (i.e., disclosure quality is high).

In this study, we consider the effects of the asymmetry in capital gains tax policy on the communication of private information to investors. Assuming quite plausibly that firm managers tend to favor current stockholder returns relative to future stockholder returns, though not exclusively, we identify conditions under which limitations on the deductibility of capital losses lend efficacy to unverified public disclosures that allow managers of higher value firms to separate from lower value firms in equilibrium. Although the tax asymmetry by itself may not be enough to enable separation, we show how it would nevertheless contribute to the efficiency of separation through explicitly dissipative signals. It further follows that if separation would occur by means of a dissipative signal in any event, then the tax asymmetry is welfare-enhancing. Our findings demonstrate that tax asymmetry can help resolve information asymmetry.