Agency Costs and Strategic Speculation in the U.S. Stock Market

IF 1.9 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Review of Corporate Finance Studies Pub Date : 2022-03-03 DOI:10.1093/rcfs/cfac009
Paolo Pasquariello
{"title":"Agency Costs and Strategic Speculation in the U.S. Stock Market","authors":"Paolo Pasquariello","doi":"10.1093/rcfs/cfac009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the notion that agency-driven information asymmetry may affect a firm’s stock liquidity. I postulate that less uncertainty about managerial agency problems may enhance liquidity provision by lowering dealers’ perceived adverse selection risk from trading with better-informed speculators. Consistent with my conjecture, I find that the staggered adoption of antitakeover provisions across U.S. states in the 1980s and 1990s — a plausibly exogenous shock unambiguously reducing the threat of (and speculators’ information advantage about) value-enhancing intervention — robustly improves the stock liquidity of affected firms relative to peer firms, especially at prior high fundamental or agency uncertainty and with poor governance.","PeriodicalId":44656,"journal":{"name":"Review of Corporate Finance Studies","volume":"57 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Corporate Finance Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rcfs/cfac009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the notion that agency-driven information asymmetry may affect a firm’s stock liquidity. I postulate that less uncertainty about managerial agency problems may enhance liquidity provision by lowering dealers’ perceived adverse selection risk from trading with better-informed speculators. Consistent with my conjecture, I find that the staggered adoption of antitakeover provisions across U.S. states in the 1980s and 1990s — a plausibly exogenous shock unambiguously reducing the threat of (and speculators’ information advantage about) value-enhancing intervention — robustly improves the stock liquidity of affected firms relative to peer firms, especially at prior high fundamental or agency uncertainty and with poor governance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国股票市场的代理成本与战略投机
本研究探讨了代理驱动的信息不对称可能影响公司股票流动性的概念。我假设,管理代理问题的不确定性减少,可能会通过降低交易商与消息更灵通的投机者交易时感知到的逆向选择风险,从而提高流动性供应。与我的猜想一致,我发现20世纪80年代和90年代美国各州交错采用的反收购条款——一种看似合理的外生冲击,明确降低了价值提升干预的威胁(以及投机者的信息优势)——显著提高了受影响公司相对于同行公司的股票流动性,尤其是在先前基本面或机构不确定性较高以及治理不善的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.80
自引率
1.80%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Review of Corporate Finance Studies (RCFS) is dedicated to publishing high-quality research in the expansive field of Corporate Finance. The journal seeks original contributions, reviewing papers based on their unique insights into Corporate Finance. This encompasses a wide spectrum, including a firm's interactions with stakeholders, capital markets, internal organization structure, compensation mechanisms, corporate governance, and capital management. RCFS also welcomes research in financial intermediation, financial institutions, microstructure, and the implications of asset pricing for Corporate Finance. The journal considers theoretical, empirical, and experimental papers for review.
期刊最新文献
Product Market Competition, Mergers and Acquisitions, and Covenant Redesign Higher Purpose, Employees, and the Firm Employer Dominance and Worker Earnings in Finance The Geography of Investor Attention Human Capital Reallocation across Firms: Evidence from Idiosyncratic Shocks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1