To date, there has been little modeling of the board of directors as an independent entity in the corporate finance literature. Most theoretical papers omit the board entirely and model only managers and shareholders as active players. In this paper, I model the board as an entity distinct from both management and shareholders. The analysis is based on management's power in the selection and retention of board members and it focuses on the effect of this power on the frequency of open dissent in the boardroom and the board's effectiveness in disciplining management. The model predicts behavior consistent with empirical observation and produces testable implications about the links between board compensation, structure, and information and the frequency of board dissent and the level of board effectiveness.

In this paper I find that aggregate security returns are highly correlated with concurrent unexpected cash flows into mutual funds, but unrelated to concurrent expected flows. An unexpected inflow equal to 1% of total stock fund assets ($4.75 billion) corresponds to a 5.7% increase in the stock price index. Further, fund flows are correlated with the returns of the securities held by the funds, but not with the returns of other types of securities. I find evidence of a positive relation between flows and subsequent returns and evidence of a negative relation between returns and subsequent flows.

We develop a dynamic model of the adoption of financial innovations. Each period, firms decide whether or not to adopt an innovation of uncertain value, and the profitability of each period’s adoptions reveals information about the innovation’s value. We show that characteristics of financial innovation waves cited by critics as evidence of irrational excess are, in fact, consistent with fully rational behavior. We also show that social welfare is enhanced when more firms adopt innovations of questionable value and that financial intermediaries have an incentive to encourage such adoption.

[We develop a dynamic model of the adoption of financial innovations. Each period, firms decide whether or not to adopt an innovation of uncertain value, and the profitability of each period's adoptions reveals information about the innovation's value. We show that characteristics of financial innovation waves cited by critics as evidence of irrational excess are, in fact, consistent with fully rational behavior. We also show that social welfare is enhanced when more firms adopt innovations of questionable value and that financial intermediaries have an incentive to encourage such adoption.]

ABSTRACT We investigate the bias in CRSP's Nasdaq data due to missing returns for delisted stocks. We find that the missing returns are large and negative on average, and that delisted stocks experience a substantial decrease in liquidity. We estimate that using a corrected return of −55 percent for missing performance‐related delisting returns corrects the bias. We revisit previous work which finds a size effect among Nasdaq stocks. After correcting for the delisting bias, there is no evidence that there ever was a size effect on Nasdaq. Our results are inconsistent with most risk‐based explanations of the size effect.

We investigate the bias in CRSP's Nasdaq data due to missing returns for delisted stocks. We find that the missing returns are large and negative on average, and that delisted stocks experience a substantial decrease in liquidity. We estimate that using a corrected return of −55 percent for missing performance‐related delisting returns corrects the bias. We revisit previous work which finds a size effect among Nasdaq stocks. After correcting for the delisting bias, there is no evidence that there ever was a size effect on Nasdaq. Our results are inconsistent with most risk‐based explanations of the size effect.

We compare dividend policies of U.S. and Japanese firms, partitioning the Japanese data into keiretsu, independent, and hybrid firms. We examine the correlation between dividend changes and stock returns, and the reluctance to change dividends. Results are consistent with the joint hypotheses that Japanese firms, particularly keiretsu-member firms, face less information asymmetry and fewer agency conflicts than U.S. firms, and that information asymmetries and/or agency conflicts affect dividend policy. Japanese firms experience smaller stock price reactions to dividend omissions and initiations, they are less reluctant to omit and cut dividends, and their dividends are more responsive to earnings changes.

ABSTRACT We compare dividend policies of U.S. and Japanese firms, partitioning the Japanese data into keiretsu, independent, and hybrid firms. We examine the correlation between dividend changes and stock returns, and the reluctance to change dividends. Results are consistent with the joint hypotheses that Japanese firms, particularly keiretsu‐member firms, face less information asymmetry and fewer agency conflicts than U.S. firms, and that information asymmetries and/or agency conflicts affect dividend policy. Japanese firms experience smaller stock price reactions to dividend omissions and initiations, they are less reluctant to omit and cut dividends, and their dividends are more responsive to earnings changes.

We examine underwriting fees for repeat issuers of new securities to determine the relation between loyalty to an underwriting bank and the fees charged. For a sample of offers over the 1975–2001 period, we find that loyalty is associated with lower fees for common stock offers, consistent with valuable relationship capital being built through loyalty. For debt offers, however, we find the opposite pattern, consistent with relationship capital not being as valuable. For both offer types, firms that graduate to higher-quality banks face lower fees. Firms that are more likely to be switching banks to improve analyst coverage face higher fees for common stock offers, but not for debt offers.