Intraindustry Effects of Bank Stock Repurchases

Bank stock repurchases have become increasingly popular over time. Because of the unique capital requirements and regulatory constraints on the use of bank funds, the intraindustry effects of bank stock repurchases may differ from intraindustry effects of stock repurchases by other firms. We find that bank stock repurchases result in a positive and significant valuation effect for the repurchasing banks. Moreover, we find positive significant intraindustry effects of bank stock repurchases, unlike previous research by Hertzel on firms from numerous industries that found no evidence of intraindustry effects in response to stock repurchases. We attribute the difference in results to the unique characteristics of the banking industry, which results in a less ambiguous signal emitted from the stock repurchase announcement. In addition, we find that the intraindustry effects are more favorable when the valuation effect for the repurchasing bank is more favorable. This implies that the degree of signal to the industry is conditioned on the degree of signal about the bank that is repurchasing its shares. Furthermore, intraindustry effects are more favorable when the capital position of rival banks is high, when the proportion of residential loans of rival banks is low, and when the announcing bank is a money center bank.     

The Role of Private Equity in Life Sciences

In a roundtable published in this journal a year ago, there was a clear consensus that the R&D function in big pharma was inefficient and in need of major restructuring, possibly through increased investments by venture capital and private equity firms. In this discussion, an accomplished group of industry practitioners begins by looking at the prospects for both venture capital and private equity to play meaningful roles in financing early- and mid-stage drug development. In so doing, they explore questions like the following:

• • Are there ways for big pharma and biotech to reduce “science risk” and make R&D funding more profitable and attractive to venture capital and private equity—and perhaps even hedge funds?
• • What roles do you see for specialty PE firms like Symphony Capital and Paul Capital, which are now bundling mid-stage development assets and securitizing royalties?

Then the panelists turn to the broader life sciences industry and consider the outlook for leveraged private equity transactions involving marketed products, late-stage development, and services. Here they consider issues like the following:

• • Will PE be attracted to less-R&D-intensive activities like medtech and generics?
• • Have the recent consolidation through mergers and reorganization of big pharma into decentralized business units created opportunities for carve-outs of certain businesses?

For big pharma and life sciences companies in general, the answers to such questions point to greater specialization and focus achieved partly through strategic alliances with venture capital, private equity, and even hedge funds, and involving marketed products and services as well as early-stage drug development.     

Are public and private outlays for physical and knowledge capital accumulation equally productive?

Utility firms are subject to peculiar regulatory characteristics that may allow for unique wealth effects resulting from acquisitions. The wealth effects derived from acquisitions of utility firms is measured and the analysis reveals negative wealth effects for acquirers and positive wealth effects for targets. However, the wealth effects are generally less favorable for utility firm acquirers than other acquirer firms because of the regulatory barriers that prevent them from pursuing attractive targets.