I test the hypothesis that short debt maturity attenuates the negative effect of growth opportunities on leverage. Using simultaneous equations with leverage and maturity endogenous, I find strong support for an economically significant attenuation effect. The negative effect of growth opportunities on leverage for firms with all shorter-term debt is less than one-sixth as large as the effect for firms with all longer-term debt. Short maturity also increases liquidity risk, however, which negatively affects leverage. The results suggest that firms trade off the cost of underinvestment problems against the cost of liquidity risk when choosing short maturity.

I examine the relation between corporate debt ownership structure and several firm characteristics suggested by recent theory. The results demonstrate the importance of monitoring and information costs, the likelihood and costs of inefficient liquidation, and borrowers' incentives in affecting firms' debt source preferences. Several theoretical predictions receive support, while others do not. The results also suggest important differences between bank and private non-bank debt, which contrasts with most theoretical models. Additionally, I find evidence of systematic use of bank debt by firms with access to public debt, suggesting the benefits attributed to bank debt in theoretical models remain important after firms gain access to public debt markets. Although different lenders appear to have different maturity preferences, the results also suggest debt maturity and debt ownership decisions may be separable.

Recent theoretical models suggest debt and dividends can serve as substitute free cash flow control or signaling devices. I examine share price responses to announcements of straight debt issues and test whether there are systematic differences between low and high dividend payout firms. Share price response is significantly positive for low growth-low dividend payout firms, and is negatively related to cross-sectional dividend payout. The results support arguments that debt and dividends are substitutes. The results also support arguments that debt provides free cash flow or signaling benefits, but suggest the benefits are significant only for firms with low levels of substitutes. I also document that low growth-low dividend payout firms enter capital markets less frequently, but find no relation between share price response and this frequency.

I test the hypothesis that short debt maturity attenuates the negative effect of growth opportunities on leverage. Using simultaneous equations with leverage and maturity endogenous, I find strong support for an economically significant attenuation effect. The negative effect of growth opportunities on leverage for firms with all shorter-term debt is less than one-sixth as large as the effect for firms with all longer-term debt. Short maturity also increases liquidity risk, however, which negatively affects leverage. The results suggest that firms trade off the cost of underinvestment problems against the cost of liquidity risk when choosing short maturity.

[We reexamine long-term abnormal returns for portfolios sorted on governance characteristics. Firms with strong shareholder rights and firms with weak shareholder rights differ from the population of firms and from each other in how they cluster across industries. Using well-specified tests under this industry clustering, we find statistically zero long-term abnormal returns for portfolios sorted on governance. Our results have important implications for interpreting studies that link governance to firm value and stock returns, demonstrate the importance of the coarseness of industry definitions in financial research, and shed light on addressing statistical problems created by industry clustering in samples.]

The Dodd–Frank Act created differential regulatory requirements for banks above specified asset size thresholds. Event study results imply greater expected net regulatory costs for above-threshold banks. Consistent with hypotheses that near-below-threshold banks alter their behavior to attempt to avoid or delay the regulatory costs and/or to ensure growth that they do experience is highly beneficial, we find that near-below-threshold banks grow assets, risk-weighted assets, and total loans more slowly, and charge higher rates on commercial loans. The results suggest that the Dodd–Frank Act created costs that near-below-threshold banks attempt to avoid by altering their behaviors in economically important ways.

Acquisitions among New York Stock Exchange specialist firms can increase specialist firm size, capitalization, and market concentration, and thereby affect the market quality of the stocks they trade. We find that while traded stocks show significant improvement in several market quality measures following acquisitions, similar changes are evident in matched control stocks not involved in acquisitions. We conclude that specialist firm acquisitions either do not improve market quality, or improve market quality, but competitive and other pressures (resulting partly from the acquisitions themselves) force improvements in market quality for control stocks also. Either interpretation implies that specialist acquisitions have not had deleterious effects on market quality.

We examine the value and incentive effects of six nontraditional executive stock options: premium options, performance-vested options, repriceable options, purchased options, reload options, and indexed options. With reasonable parameter values, four options have lower value than a traditional option when granted, and large differences in value are evident across the types. Holding option value constant, five options create stronger incentives than traditional options to increase stock price, five create stronger incentives to increase risk, and three create stronger incentives to reduce dividend yield. Changing various option-specific parameters can produce large changes in incentive strengths.

We distinguish between horizontal and vertical joint ventures, and find correspondingly different valuation effects. Horizontal joint ventures create synergistic gains that are shared by the partners. In contrast, vertical joint ventures generate gains only for suppliers. This is similar to the patter we find for simple contracts, which suggests economic similiarities between vertical joint ventures and contracts. Analysing firms' choices between these contracting options, we find that firms choose vertical joint ventures over simple contracts when potential hold-up problems are severe and when suppliers face finance constraints. The results d not support a risk-sharing motive for joint ventures.

Do managerial incentive horizons have capital market consequences? We find that they do when short-sale constraints are more binding. Firms experience significant stock price inflation when their CEOs have short horizon incentives. The short-horizon CEOs sell more shares at inflated prices and generate greater abnormal trading profits. The stock price inflation is partly explained by greater earnings surprises and more positive investor reaction to the surprises. To inflate stock prices, short-horizon firms are more likely to employ income-increasing discretionary accruals. Consistent with theoretical predictions, all these effects are attenuated or statistically insignificant when short-sale constraints are less binding.