Price rigidities and institutional variations in markets with posted prices

Summary Standard laboratory posted-offer markets respond slowly and incompletely to demand shocks. In these one-sided markets, where sellers control the setting of prices, very little information is transmitted via the process of exchange. For this reason, traders have trouble distinguishing randomness in their own experience from changes in market fundamentals. This paper reports the results of twelve laboratory markets conducted to assess whether some common variants to standard posted-offer rules can correct the adjustment deficiences. Although discounting, multiple postings and excess demand information all improve performance, we find that response remains poor, and efficiencies low.Support for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation (SBR 9319842 and SBR 9320044), and the University of Virginia Bankard Fund. Data are archived at FTP address: fido.econlab.arizona.edu. We wish to thank Charles Plott and Shyam Sunder for useful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The usual disclaimer applies.     

The Impact of Option Introduction on Stock Return Variances: The Role of Bid-Ask Spreads, Return Autocorrelations, and Intrinsic Variances

The purpose of this paper is to examine changes in stock return variances following option introduction. The sample consists of National Market System stocks and employs both transaction returns and returns based on bid and ask quotes. Variances are decomposed into portions attributable to bid-ask spreads, return autocorrelations, and intrinsic variances. Spreads play a negligible role in explaining variance changes. A generally positive component to short-term autocorrelations falls following option introduction, increasing variances over short holding periods. Intrinsic variances fall prior to the October 1987 crash, but do not change after the crash with option introduction.     

Migration as a Strategy of Accumulation: Social and Economic Change in Eighteenth-Century Savoy

Migration from the mountain areas of pre-industrial Europe has been seen as the product of poverty. While hardship controlled the strategies of the more marginalized households, better placed families used their migration experience to establish themselves in commerce. Over generations they used contacts and kinship systems to develop important informal trading networks. It is difficult to establish the effects of this hidden activity on local mountain economies, but dowry payments and post mortem inventories are used to expose the impact of inflowing capital and its circulation.     

A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECT OF 12B–1 PLANS ON MUTUAL FUND EXPENSE RATIOS

In this paper we re-examine the effect of 12b–1 payments on mutual fund expense ratios by analyzing data from 1988 through 1991. The findings are consistent with previous studies that find charges are a dead-weight cost borne by shareholders. However, we show that this cost increases over time.     

Nea presidential address, 1991: Sixteenth-century European expansion and the economic decline of Africa (in honor of Walter Rodney)

Prior to the sixteenth century, the Indian Ocean trading network was one of the wealthiest commercial regions in the world. It included states of East Africa, the Arabian peninsula, the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia, China and Japan. By circumnavigating Africa, Portugal was the first European nation to gain access to the region. Through the exercise of naval superiority, blockading of strategic shipping lanes, imposition of duties and expulsion of Swahili and Muslim merchants, Portugal exercised a mercantile monopoly which ultimately led to the region’s rapid economic decline. Using rare historical documents from Po rtugal and Africa, this study traces the effects of Portuguese expansion on the economies of East Africa and trade in the Indian Ocean.     

Competitive and Information Effects of Cross-Border Stock Listings

We examine the effect of 269 cross‐border listings on rivals in the listing and domestic markets and find that U.S. rivals experience significant gains whereas domestic rivals do not. Both competitive and information effects are important in explaining the reaction of U.S. rivals. Regarding the competitive effects, the reaction of rivals is less favorable when listings originate in developed countries and more favorable when listing firms do not have prior operating presence in the United States. Regarding the information effects, the reaction is less favorable when listings are combined with equity offerings and more favorable when the listing is the first to occur within an industry.     

Are Securitizations in Substance Sales or Secured Borrowings? Capital‐Market Evidence*

Two standard‐setting approaches have emerged globally to guide the choice of accounting for securitizations: the control and components approach (SFAS No. 125 and SFAS No. 140) and the risks and rewards transfer approach (IAS No. 39). A lack of consensus about derecognition accounting is a major impediment to achieving convergence in global standards that must be resolved. Thus, both SFAS No. 140 and IAS No. 39 will be reexamined, and evidence pertinent to the debate is timely and important. In this study, we present evidence consistent with the view of credit‐rating analysts, who view many securitizations as, in substance, secured borrowings. Specifically, for a sample of originators applying sale accounting guidance in SFAS No. 125 / 140 during the period 1997‐2003, we show that off‐balance‐sheet debt related to securitizations has, on average, the same risk‐relevance for explaining market measures of risk (that is, CAPM beta) as on‐balance‐sheet debt. We also find that, in a returns and earnings association framework, the pricing multiple on securitization gains declines as the amount of off‐balance‐sheet debt increases, implying that investors take off‐balance‐sheet debt into account when assessing the valuation‐relevance of such gains. For those who advocate the control and components approach to securitization accounting, our results suggest that, at least for frequent securitizers, the put option arising from implicit recourse is a “missing piece” that is not currently accounted for when calculating securitization gains. Our results challenge the extant measurement standards in SFAS No. 140.