This paper studies a competitive asset market characterized by an adverse selection problem. The analysis focuses on the link between the market participants’ productive activities and discretionary disclosures. While informed parties’ discretion over disclosure allows them to earn private gains, it leads to an inefficient allocation of resources. A more informative signal makes the informed parties better off, but reduces the uninformed parties’ welfare. Nonetheless, it improves the economy's allocative efficiency. The paper also shows that when the signal quality is endogenous, the informed parties over-invest in the signal informativeness relative to the level that maximizes social welfare.

This paper examines the private and social optimality of full disclosure of private information in a two‐period oligopoly model. An incumbent firm is privately informed about the market demand and its production cost after operating as a monopolist in the first period, and then competes against an entrant in the second period. Two main results are derived. First, it is shown that the incumbent is best off by pre‐committing to disclose both the demand and cost information. By disclosing full information, the incumbent nullifies its self‐defeating intertemporal incentives, which arise whenever it has private information about the market demand, its cost efficiency, or both. In addition, the equilibrium output variance is the largest under full disclosure, which benefits the incumbent ex ante. Second, the paper shows that the incumbent’s full disclosure of the demand and cost information may or may not be desirable from a social efficiency standpoint. In particular, the correlation between the firms’ production costs is crucial to the rank of disclosure policies in terms of their impact on social efficiency.