We investigate product-market competition when managers maximize shareholder value rather than their expected discounted value of profits. If shareholders are imperfectly informed about future profitability, shareholder-value maximization can lead to either more or less aggressive product-market strategies. Lower rivals’ profits lead investors to believe that the firm’s costs are low relative to those of its rivals and that the industry’s prospects are poor. If the former (latter) inference dominates, each firm tries to lower (raise) its rivals’ profits to increase its own stock price. We also consider implications for corporate financial structure.

[We investigate product-market competition when managers maximize shareholder value rather than their expected discounted value of profits. If shareholders are imperfectly informed about future profitability, shareholder-value maximization can lead to either more or less aggressive product-market strategies. Lower rivals' profits lead investors to believe that the firm's costs are low relative to those of its rivals and that the industry's prospects are poor. If the former (latter) inference dominates, each firm tries to lower (raise) its rivals' profits to increase its own stock price. We also consider implications for corporate financial structure.]

By committing to terminate funding if a firm's performance is poor, investors can mitigate managerial incentive problems. These optimal financial constraints, however, encourage rivals to ensure that a firm's performance is poor; this raises the chance that the financial constraints become binding and induce exit. We analyze the optimal financial contract in light of this predatory threat. The optimal contract balances the benefits of deterring predation by relaxing financial constraints against the cost of exacerbating incentive problems.

This paper examines some of the forces that can lead to herd behavior in investment. Under certain circumstances, managers simply mimic the investment decisions of other managers, ignoring substantive private information. Although this behavior is inefficient from a social standpoint, it can be rational from the perspective of managers who are concerned about their reputations in the labor market. We discuss applications of the model to corporate investment, the stock market, and decision making within firms.

By committing to terminate funding if a firm's performance is poor, investors can mitigate managerial incentive problems. These optimal financial constraints, however, encourage rivals to ensure that a firm's performance is poor; this raises the chance that the financial constraints become binding and induce exit. The authors analyze the optimal financial contract in light of this predatory threat. The optimal contract balances the benefits of deterring predation by relaxing financial constraints against the cost of exacerbating incentive problems.

We explore the idea that financial distress is costly because free-rider problems and information asymmetries make it difficult for firms to renegotiate with their creditors. We present evidence that Japanese firms with financial structures in which these problems are likely to be small perform better than other firms after the onset of distress. In particular, we show that firms in industrial groups — those with close financial relationships to their banks, suppliers, and customers — invest more and sell more after the onset of distress than nongroup firms. We find similar results for nongroup firms that nevertheless have strong ties to a main bank.