Analyst Reputation,Communication, and Information Acquisition

Earlier studies have shown that reputational concerns tend to reduce agents' opportunistic behavior. However, a recent study by Morris argued that analysts' (experts') reputational concerns may discourage truthful communication when they try to avoid being perceived as being misaligned with investors. In this paper, I examine the effect of reputational concerns on communication in a setting where analysts can choose their precision endogenously. Because both misaligned and aligned analysts want investors to trust their reports in the future, both will aim to build a reputation for being aligned. In equilibrium, aligned analysts will acquire more information than misaligned analysts. As a result, investors may favorably update their beliefs about the analysts' type when the report is proven to be accurate. Therefore, both types of analysts will have reputational incentives to communicate truthfully. The paper also derives conditions under which the analysts' reputational concerns have a nonmonotonic impact on aligned analysts' equilibrium precision choices and investors' welfare.     

Imperfect durability and the Coase conjecture

This article considers a market served by a monopolist who sells a durable good that depreciates stochastically over time. We show that there exist three types of stationary equilibria: a Coase Conjecture equilibrium, a monopoly equilibrium, and a reputational equilibrium. When the depreciation rate is low, the Coase Conjecture equilibrium is the unique equilibrium. For intermediate values of the depreciation rate, all three equilibrium types coexist. When the depreciation rate is high, the monopoly equilibrium is the unique equilibrium. Consequently, when selling a good of sufficiently low durability, the monopolist does not lose any of her monopoly power. Furthermore, the steady‐state output in the reputational equilibrium falls below the monopoly quantity. Hence, in durable goods markets, welfare losses due to monopoly power may be larger than in markets for perishables.     

The Quality and Price of Investment Banks’ Service: Evidence from the PIPE Market

We investigate the market structure and the pricing by placement agents of private investments in public equities (PIPEs). Our findings indicate that more reputable agents are associated with larger offers and with firms possessing lower risk. Agent reputation is positively associated with lower discounts and an enhanced post-PIPE trading environment. Issuers pay a higher dollar fee for these benefits, although more reputable agents charge a lower percentage fee. The evidence suggests that it is the quality of the issuing firm, and the pricing and reputational concern of the placement agent, that drives the equilibrium in the PIPE market.     

Does reputation matter? Evidence on spatial competition in China's bond market

This study investigates the effect of market competition on the reputational concerns of credit rating agencies (CRAs) in the Chinese bond market. We find credit ratings increase when the market share distance between an incumbent CRA and its closest peer competitor decreases. This spatial competition effect only exists at the provincial level. We also find the market competition deteriorates the ability of ratings to predict future bond defaults, while the correlation between credit ratings and market-implied credit spreads is unaffected. Our findings suggest that because of the market inefficiency in emerging economies, CRAs privilege current profits over reputational concerns.     

Accounting information,disclosure, and expected utility: Do investors really abhor uncertainty?

Investors are said to “abhor uncertainty,” but if there were no uncertainty they could earn only the risk‐free rate. A fundamental result in the analytical accounting literature shows that investors buying into a CARA‐normal CAPM market pay lower asset prices, gain higher ex‐ante expected returns, and obtain higher expected utility, when the market payoff has higher variance. New investors obtain similar “welfare” gains from risk under a log/power utility CAPM. These results do not imply that investors “abhor information.” To realize investors' ex‐ante expectations, the subjective probability distributions representing market expectations must be accurate. Greater payoff risk can add to investors' expected utility, but higher ex‐post(realized) utility comes from better information and more accurate ex‐ante expectations. An important implication for accounting is that greater disclosure can have the simultaneous effects of (i) exposing more fully or perceptibly firms' payoff uncertainty, thereby increasing new investors' expected utility, and (ii) improving market estimates of firms' payoff parameters (means, variances, covariances), thereby giving investors a better chance of realizing their expectations. Paradoxically, better information can be valuable to new investors by exposing more fully and more accurately the risk in firms' business operations and results–new investors maximizing expected utility want both more risk and better information.     

The term structure of mutual fund herding

This paper investigates institutional herding behaviours in the U.S. Treasury market. We find that the level of herding is higher for bonds with a longer time to maturity and this pattern is significant only for buy herding, not sell herding. This term structure of herding is stronger for funds with a shorter investment horizon. These patterns remain strong for Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities and for Treasuries with high coupon rates. Overall, our findings support investors' short-termism as a channel for the term structure of herding and are inconsistent with other herding explanations, such as spurious herding, reputational concerns and information cascades.     

Management Quality and Equity Issue Characteristics: A Comparison of SEOs and IPOs

We use hand-collected data on the management quality of firms making seasoned equity offerings (SEOs) or initial public offerings (IPOs) to analyze the relationship between management quality and equity issue characteristics, and to compare the effect of management quality on SEOs versus IPOs. We hypothesize that higher quality managers are more credible to equity market investors, thereby reducing the information asymmetry they face in the market and outsiders’ information production costs. Therefore, the equity issues of higher management quality firms will have more reputable underwriters, smaller underwriting spreads, and other expenses, and smaller SEO discounts. Further, since better managers will be able to select better projects, higher management quality firms will have larger offer sizes. Finally, since SEO firms are likely to suffer from less information asymmetry compared to IPO firms, these effects will be smaller for SEOs than for IPOs. Our findings support the above hypotheses. Our direct tests of the relationship between management quality and information asymmetry, and our comparison of information asymmetry in SEOs versus IPOs provide further support for these hypotheses.     

The Labor Market for Directors and Externalities in Corporate Governance

This paper studies how directors' reputational concerns affect board structure, corporate governance, and firm value. In our setting, directors affect their firms' governance, and governance in turn affects firms' demand for new directors. Whether the labor market rewards a shareholder‐friendly or management‐friendly reputation is determined in equilibrium and depends on aggregate governance. We show that directors' desire to be invited to other boards creates strategic complementarity of corporate governance across firms. Directors' reputational concerns amplify the governance system: strong systems become stronger and weak systems become weaker. We derive implications for multiple directorships, board size, transparency, and board independence.     

The Impact of Cross‐Listing on the Home Market's Information Environment and Stock Price Efficiency

We empirically examine changes in information asymmetry and informational efficiency of cross‐listed stocks in their home market around a cross‐listing in the United States. We estimate intraday market microstructure measures of information asymmetry and price efficiency, and find that a U.S. cross‐listing significantly improves the quality of a firm's information environment and stock price efficiency in the home market. This improvement is stronger for cross‐listings that take place after the adoption of Sarbanes‐Oxley Act. Our results demonstrate that stricter disclosure from a U.S. cross‐listing is beneficial, in line with the legal and reputational bonding hypotheses.     

Reputation and turnover

We consider a repeated duopoly game where each firm privately chooses its investment in quality, and realized quality is a noisy indicator of the firm's investment. We focus on turnover equilibria in which a low‐quality realization is penalized by lowering future demand of the firm that delivered this quality. We determine when a turnover equilibrium that gives higher welfare than the static equilibrium exists and how this relates to market fundamentals. We also derive comparative statics properties, and we characterize a set of investment levels and, hence, payoffs that turnover equilibria sustain.     

Comparative advertising: disclosing horizontal match information

Improved consumer information about horizontal aspects of products of similar quality leads to better consumer matching but also to higher prices, so consumer surplus can go up or down, while profits rise. With enough quality asymmetry, though, the higher‐quality (and hence larger) firm's price falls with more information, so both effects benefit consumers. This occurs when comparative advertising is used against a large firm by a small one. Comparative advertising, as it imparts more information, therefore helps consumers. Although it also improves the profitability of the small firm, overall welfare goes down because of the large loss to the attacked firm.     

Intensive margin of the Volcker rule: Price quality and welfare

We analyze the impact of dealer regulation on price quality (informativeness and volatility) and its implications for the welfare of market participants. We argue that although price informativeness, volatility, and the dealer’s profitability all deteriorate, against conventional wisdom, other market participants are better off due to the dealer’s risk-shifting motive. A static model is used to clarify the main intuition, and the robustness of the welfare results, as well as the fragility of the conventional wisdom about price quality, are discussed by incorporating dynamics and endogenizing information acquisition.     

Ratings quality over the business cycle

Credit rating agencies (CRAs) have long held that reputational concerns discipline their behavior. The value of reputation, however, depends on economic fundamentals that vary over the business cycle. In a model of ratings incorporating endogenous reputation and a market environment that varies, we find that ratings quality is countercyclical. Specifically, a CRA is more likely to issue less-accurate ratings when fee-income is high, competition in the labor market for analysts is tough, and securities' default probabilities are low. Persistence in economic conditions can diminish our results, while mean reversion exacerbates them. The presence of naive investors reduces overall quality, but quality remains countercyclical. Finally, we demonstrate that competition among CRAs yields similar results.     

Can investor-paid credit rating agencies improve the information quality of issuer-paid rating agencies?

This paper examines how the information quality of ratings from an issuer-paid rating agency (Standard and Poor's) responds to the entry of an investor-paid rating agency, the Egan-Jones Rating Company (EJR). By comparing S&P's ratings quality before and after EJR initiates coverage of each firm, I find a significant improvement in S&P's ratings quality following EJR's coverage initiation. S&P's ratings become more responsive to credit risk and its rating changes incorporate higher information content. These results differ from the existing literature documenting a deterioration in the incumbents' ratings quality following the entry of a third issuer-paid agency. I further show that the issuer-paid agency seems to improve the ratings quality because EJR's coverage has elevated its reputational concerns.     

Analyst Optimism and Incentives under Market Uncertainty

We examine how analysts’ changing incentives driven by changes in market uncertainty affect their forecast optimism. Analysts issue more optimistically biased earnings forecasts and buy recommendations under high market uncertainty (VIX). The lower reputational costs and larger benefits of optimistic output explain the increased optimistic output: Analysts are less likely to be penalized for inaccuracy and can stimulate more trading activity from optimistically biased output when market uncertainty is high. We find that the likelihood of analysts’ turnover decreases, while the trading volume associated with optimistic output increases, with VIX. No evidence suggests that analysts’ self‐selection affects our findings on optimism and market uncertainty.     

PRIOR UNCERTAINTY,ANALYST BIAS,AND SUBSEQUENT ABNORMAL RETURNS

In this paper we examine the relation between analysts' overoptimism and uncertainty as proxied by the standard deviation of earnings forecasts. We find a positive relation between overoptimism and uncertainty, but very little or no optimism when uncertainty is low. If the uncertainty surrounding a firm is high, analysts have fewer reputational concerns when they act on their inclinations to issue optimistic forecasts. Portfolio strategies based on these findings generate abnormal returns. The results suggest that greater prior uncertainty leads to higher analyst optimism, which in turn causes market overvaluation and profitable portfolio strategies.     

Redistributive taxation and social insurance under adverse selection in the insurance market

This paper extends the analysis of optimal income taxation under uncertainty studied by Cremer and Pestieau (International Tax and Public Finance, 3, 281–295, 1996). We introduce asymmetric information in the insurance market whereby private insurance companies cannot identify the risk probability of the agents, and we examine its effect on public policy. We consider the separating equilibrium of Rothschild and Stiglitz (Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 629–649, 1976) and Riley (Econometrica, 47, 331–359, 1979) where the low risk agent is only partially insured. The presence of the distortion in the insurance market changes the affinity of labor, and in some cases, we show that the scope of redistribution and the resulting social welfare are higher under asymmetric information than under full information. We also show that the increase in social insurance affects the utility and labor incentive of the low risk type by relaxing the self-selection constraint in the insurance market. The policy implications of the redistributive taxation and social insurance are analytically and numerically examined.      

Search,bargaining, and signalling in the market for legal services

Over the last eight centuries, lawyers in common law countries have generally been precluded from buying their clients’ cases. Recently, a number of economists and lawyers have argued that sale should be allowed so as to eliminate moral hazard, particularly when contingent fees are used; this argument is based on full‐information reasoning. However, if the lawyer has private information about the case value, then compensation demands potentially signal this value when the client can search over lawyers. We provide a formal model and a family of computational examples that show that allowing (possibly partial) purchase can reduce expected social efficiency.     

The Effect of Sequential Information Arrival on Asset Prices: An Experimental Study

A complete understanding of security markets requires a simultaneous explanation of price behavior, trading volume, portfolio composition (ie., asset allocation), and bid-ask spreads. In this paper, these variables are observed in a controlled setting—a computerized double auction market, similar to NASDAQ. Our laboratory allows experimental control of information arrival—whether simultaneously or sequentially received, and whether homogeneous or heterogeneous. We compare the price, volume, and share allocations of three market equilibrium models: telepathic rational expectations, which assumes that traders can read each others minds (strong-form market efficiency); ordinary rational expectations, which assumes traders can use (some) market price information, (a type of semi-strong form efficiency); and private information, where traders use no market information. We conclude 1) that stronger-form market models predict equilibrium prices better than weaker-form models, 2) that there were fewer misallocation forecasts in simultaneous information arrival (SIM) environments, 3) that trading volume was significantly higher in SIM environments, 4) and that bid-ask spreads widen significantly when traders are exposed to price uncertainty resulting from information heterogeneity.     

Information provision in financial markets

We set up a rational expectations model in which investors trade a risky asset based on a private signal they receive about the quality of the asset, and a public signal that represents a noisy aggregation of the private signals of all investors. Our model allows us to examine what happens to market performance (market depth, price efficiency, volume of trade, and expected welfare) when regulators can induce improved information provision in one of two ways. Regulations can be designed that either provide investors with more accurate information by improving the quality of prior information, or that enhance the transparency of the market by improving the quality of the public signal. In our rational expectations equilibrium, improving the quality of the public signal can be interpreted as a way of providing information about the anticipations and trading motives of all market participants. We find that both alternatives improve market depth. However, in the limit, we show that improving the precision of prior information is a more efficient way to do so. More accurate prior information decreases asymmetric information problems and consequently reduces the informativeness of prices, while a more accurate public signal increases price informativeness. The volume of trade is independent of the quality of prior information and is increasing in the quality of the public signal. Finally, expected welfare can sometimes fall as prior information or the public signal become more precise.