Financing constraints, cash-flow risk, and corporate investment

Using an analytically tractable two-period model of a financially constrained firm, we derive an investment threshold that is U-shaped in cash holdings. We show analytically the relevant trade-offs leading to the U-shape: the firm balances financing costs for present and future investment, respectively. Our main argument is that financing costs today are more important than the risk of future financing costs. The empirically testable implications are that low-cash firms facing financing costs today are more reluctant to invest if they have less cash, or if their future cash flows are more risky. On the other hand, cash-rich firms facing no financing costs today invest in less favorable projects (i.e., forgo their real option to wait) if they have less cash, or if their future cash flows are more risky. The magnitude of these effects is amplified by the degree of market frictions that the firms are facing.     

Optimal investment with fixed financing costs

Models with a premium on external finance produce counterfactual predictions about liquidity management. We address this shortcoming by introducing a fixed cost of increasing external finance into an otherwise standard investment/financing problem. This additional financial friction is well-motivated by case studies and our analysis shows that it generates more realistic predictions about liquidity management: firms hold external finance and idle cash simultaneously, and may invest an additional dollar of cash flow in liquidity rather than repaying external funds or investing in productive capital. In addition to better fitting the stylized facts about the time-series and cross-sectional pattern of liquidity holding, these results may help shed light on the fragility of estimates of investment–cash flow sensitivities.     

The impact of assets-in-place on corporate financing and investment decisions

In a dynamic setting with asymmetric information we consider firms’ debt-equity choice and investment timing. We extend recent research by adding an abandonment option and assets-in-place and we show that these extensions make debt more attractive. This implies, e.g., that mature firms (with larger assets-in-place) mainly use debt financing, whereas young high-growth firms (without assets-in-place) frequently use equity financing and signal their type by early investment. Simulation analyses confirm this and our model is thus able to explain empirical patterns which contradict the static pecking order theory.     

Earnings management and firm valuation under asymmetric information

This paper seeks to provide an explanation for why corporate officers manage the disclosure of accounting information. We show that earnings management affects firm value when value-maximizing managers and investors are asymmetrically informed. In equilibrium, the strategic management of reported earnings influences investors' assessments of the market values of companies' shares.     

Costly external financing, investment timing, and investment–cash flow sensitivity

This paper examines the effects of costly external financing on the optimal timing of a firm's investment. By altering the optimal investment timing, costly financing affects current investment and the sensitivity of investment to internal cash flow. Importantly, the relation between the cost of external funds and investment–cash flow sensitivity is non-monotonic. Investment–cash flow sensitivity is decreasing in the cost of external financing when it is relatively low and is increasing in the financing cost when it is high. Empirical tests examining investment–cash flow sensitivities within groups of firms classified by proxies for their costs of external funds provide evidence consistent with the model. The model and the empirical results complement recent studies by Cleary, Povel and Raith [Cleary, S., Povel, P. and Raith, M., 2007. The U-shaped investment curve: theory and evidence, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 42, 1–39.] and Almeida and Campello [Almeida, H. and Campello, M., in press, Financial constraints, asset tangibility and corporate investment, Review of Financial Studies.] that show a non-monotonic relation between firms' investment and the availability of internal funds.     

Real investment and risk dynamics

We ask to what extent the negative relation between investment and average stock returns is driven by risk. We show that: (i) the average return spread between low and high asset growth and investment portfolios is largely accounted for by their spread in systematic risk, as measured by the loadings on the Chen, Roll, and Ross (1986) factors; (ii) as predicted by q-theory and real options models, systematic risk falls during large investment periods; (iii) the returns of factors formed on the investment-to-assets, asset growth, and investment growth all forecast aggregate economic activities. Our evidence suggests that risk plays an important role in explaining the investment-return relation.     

Domestic and International Equity REIT Joint Ventures: Structuring Corporate Options

We examine a sample of 185 Joint Ventures parented by publicly-traded Equity Real Estate Investment Trusts 1994–2001. These transactions are found to be motivated by a wide variety of corporate strategies. Shareholder returns for REIT parents are significantly positive, which is consistent with wealth effects previously reported for joint ventures formed by non-REIT real estate firms. In a subsample of joint ventures formed to structure partial dispositions of property, however, abnormal returns are significantly negative, which is consistent with the free cash flow theory of Jensen. REIT joint venture experience in Asia has been neutral for value, but may improve in the future if early ventures have created options for more efficient partnerships later.     

Real options under a double exponential jump-diffusion model with regime switching and partial information

We consider the irreversible investment in a project which generates a cash flow following a double exponential jump-diffusion process and its expected return is governed by a continuous-time two-state Markov chain. If the expected return is observable, we present explicit expressions for the pricing and timing of the option to invest. With partial information, i.e. if the expected return is unobservable, we provide an explicit project value and an integral-differential equation for the pricing and timing of the option. We provide a method to measure the information value, i.e. the difference between the option values under the two different cases. We present numerical solutions by finite difference methods. By numerical analysis, we find that: (i) the higher the jump intensity, the later the option to invest is exercised, but its effect on the option value is ambiguous; (ii) the option value increases with the belief in a boom economy; (iii) if investors are more uncertain about the economic environment, information is more valuable; (iv) the more likely the transition from boom to recession, the lower the value of the option; (v) the bigger the dispersion of the expected return, the higher the information value; (vi) a higher cash flow volatility induces a lower information value.     

Wall of cash: The investment-cash flow sensitivity when capital becomes abundant

In the mid 2000s the oil and gas industry was hit by what might be best described as a ‘wall of cash’ as oil prices successively reached new record levels and access to external financing improved greatly. In this article we investigate what this sudden abundance of liquidity implied for the investment-cash flow relationship, the interpretation of which continues to generate controversy in the literature. For financially constrained firms we find that the investment-cash flow sensitivity decreases in the abundance period (2005–2008), suggesting that the financing constraints became less binding in this period. For financially unconstrained firms the investment-cash flow sensitivity instead increases over time, suggesting that this relationship is driven by agency problems related to free cash flow. Our paper is the first in the investment-cash flow literature to bring evidence from a natural experiment in which there was an unexpected, exogenous, substantial, and persistent decrease in the cost of external financing.     

Optimal Timing of Real Estate Investment under an Asymmetric Duopoly

This paper examines the sub-game equilibrium strategies for a duopoly real option model consisting of two firms with asymmetric demand functions. The relative strength of the firms is found to have significant impact on the firms’ equilibrium strategies. Preemptive strategies are critical if difference in strength between the two competing firms is relatively small. Short bursts and recession induced overbuilding are two outcomes in the asymmetric duopoly model. The model, however, predicts that the two phenomena occur in earlier phases of market cycles, rather than in the state of depression. In a depressed market with high volatility, the leader and the follower will both choose the waiting strategies. Construction cascade is, therefore, not an expected phenomenon in a depressed market in the asymmetric duopoly framework. Please forward your comments to the second author at rststf@nus.edu.sg. Your comments are appreciated. The authors wish to thank Stephen Cauley, Walter Torous, an anonymous referee, and participants in the Singapore–Hong Kong Real Estate Research Symposium on 14–15 July 2005 for their constructive comments and suggestions.