We examine the influence of consultants on the portfolio choices and performance of institutional asset owners’ private equity (PE) investments. We find that asset owners using the same search consultant make similar investment choices. Asset owners advised by consultants that focus on a narrower list of PE managers perform better. Among asset owners that share a consultant, those with the largest PE mandates (top clients) end up with better-performing investments. For mechanisms underlying consultants’ performance impact, we find evidence for both access and selection abilities.

[Using a unique dataset of complete bid information for every IPO auction in Taiwan during 1995-2000, we examine the behaviors and returns of two groups—institutional and retail investors—in a setting in which underwriters do not have pricing or allocation discretion. We find that the bids of institutional investors are generally consistent with the predictions of IPO auction theory for informed bidders, while those of individual investors are not. Specifically, returns are higher when more institutional investors enter the auction or bid higher prices, suggesting institutional investors are informed and are also able to shave bids adequately. However, individual investors as a group exhibit return-chasing behavior, are uninformed, and systematically overbid.]

We provide the first study of underwriter-affiliated analysts' pre-IPO research coverage and its impact on stock prices. Using proprietary data on a sample of Chinese IPOs, we document that affiliated analysts make highly overoptimistic forecasts about IPO clients. Analyst hype inflates both the offer price and the aftermarket price. Consistent with the sentiment theory, IPO investors inadequately adjust to analyst hype because the offer price is set sufficiently lower than the aftermarket price. The results hold when we instrument analyst hype with a variable that affects their hyping incentive. We also utilize a regulatory change as a quasi-experiment. Our analysis contributes to the debate about regulations on pre-IPO information provision.

We study the effectiveness of divestitures as a merger remedy. We show that divestitures are more effective in mitigating the market power impact of mergers if the merging firms divest assets to buyers outside the industry rather than existing rivals. Divestitures are also more effective as merger remedies when the merging industry is concentrated and when powerful customers are absent. Notably, stock price reactions of the acquirer and rivals suggest that firms are more concerned with maintaining a competitive edge relative to each other than gaining market power relative to customers.

Historically, a key advantage of being a public firm was broader access to capital, from a disperse group of shareholders. In recent years, such capital has increasingly become available to private firms as well. We document a dramatic increase over the past twenty years in the number of mutual funds participating in private markets and in the dollar value of these private firm investments. We evaluate several factors that potentially contribute to this trend: firms seeking extra capital to postpone public listing, mutual funds seeking higher risk-adjusted returns and initial public offering (IPO) allocations, and venture capitalists (VCs) seeking new investors to substantiate higher valuations. Results indicate that the first two factors play a significant role.

[We examine how experience affects the decisions of individual investors and institutions in IPO auctions to bid in subsequent auctions, and their bidding returns. We track bidding histories for all 31,476 individual investors and 1,232 institutional investors across all 84 IPO auctions during the period from 1995 to 2000 in Taiwan. For individual bidders, (1) high returns in previous IPO auctions increase the likelihood of participating in future auctions; (2) bidders' returns decrease as they participate in more auctions; (3) auction selection ability deteriorates with experience; and (4) those with greater experience bid more aggressively. These findings are consistent with naïve reinforcement learning wherein individuals become unduly optimistic after receiving good returns. In sharp contrast, there is little sign that institutional investors exhibit such behavior.]

We hypothesize that CEO compensation is optimally designed to trade off two types of agency problems: the standard shareholder-management agency problem as well as the risk-shifting problem between shareholders and debtholders. Analyses in this setup produces two predictions: (1) the pay-for-performance sensitivity of CEO compensation decreases with the leverage ratio; and (2) the pay-for-performance sensitivity of CEO compensation increases with the intensity of outside monitoring on the firm's risk choice. We test these two hypotheses for the banking industry where regulators and nondepository (subordinated) debtholders provide outside monitoring on the risk choice. We construct an index of the intensity of outside monitoring based on three variables: subordinated debt rating, non performing loan ratio and examination rating assigned by regulators. We find supporting evidence for both hypotheses.

We analyze initial public offering (IPO) activity under political uncertainty surrounding gubernatorial elections in the United States. There are fewer IPOs originating from a state when it is scheduled to have an election. To establish identification, we develop a neighboring-states method that uses bordering states without elections as a control group. The dampening effect of elections on IPO activity is stronger for firms with more concentrated businesses in their home states, firms that are more dependent on government contracts (particularly state contracts), and harder-to-value firms. This dampening effect is related to lower IPO offer prices (hence, higher costs of capital) during election years.

The decrease in companies going public has received widespread attention, and the associated costs are widely debated. We document that high local initial public offering (IPO) activity leads to increases in stock market participation of 5–6 percent. This is striking, given that such participation represents a key factor toward building wealth. Local IPOs increase both households’ propensity to own stock and their percent equity holdings. The attention channel drives effects: local IPOs attract attention to the market, through increased information production and publicity. The wealth channel has little influence, consistent with local IPOs not generating wealth shocks for most households.

We show that firms’ R&D activities can predict the stock returns of their industry peers. When an industry experiences substantial R&D growth driven by the activities of a small group of firms, industry peers experience positive abnormal returns and abnormal operating performance despite having no aggressive R&D growth. Exogenous industry shocks to demand or productivity do not explain these results. Further, abnormal returns are concentrated in peer firms that receive low investor attention.