Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Stock Market Reaction (stock + market_reaction)
Selected AbstractsSTOCK MARKET REACTION TO GOOD AND BAD INFLATION NEWSTHE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL RESEARCH, Issue 2 2008Johan Knif Abstract This article shows that differentiating between good and bad inflation news is important to understanding how inflation affects stock market returns. Summing positive and negative inflation shocks as in previous studies tends to wash out or mute the effects of inflation news on stock returns. More specifically, we find that, depending on the economic state, positive and negative inflation shocks can produce a variety of stock market reactions. We conclude that the effect of inflation on stock returns is conditional on whether investors perceive inflation shocks as good or bad news in different economic states. [source] Investor Reaction to Inter-corporate Business Contracting: Evidence and ExplanationECONOMIC NOTES, Issue 3 2006Fayez A. Elayan We examine the stock market reaction to 1227 inter-corporate ordinary business contract announcements reported by Dow Jones between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 2001. Around contract announcement dates, we find statistically significant positive average abnormal returns and abnormal trading volume for contractors, but insignificant positive abnormal returns and negative abnormal volume for contractees. Cross-sectionally, contract announcement period returns are higher for contractors who are small relative to the contract size, have higher return volatility, larger market-to-book ratios and higher profitability. The announcement period returns of contract-awarding firms are not significant and are only marginally related to cross-sectional explanatory factors. The results are consistent with two explanatory stories: contractor quasi-rents induced by the winner's curse and information signalling about contractor production costs. The results are not consistent with perfect competition, with contracts having positive net present values for both parties, and with a version of incomplete contracting theory. [source] Why Strikes Occur: Evidence from the Capital MarketsINDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, Issue 1 2002Jonathan K. Kramer New and existing empirical evidence regarding the stock market reaction to strikes is used to test the validity of three strike theories. A review of the existing capital market evidence reveals the need for information regarding the intraindustry announcement effects of strikes against manufacturing firms. This need is filled by applying event-study methodology, in a manner consistent with earlier studies, to a sample of strikes during the period 1982,1999. This new evidence, combined with that of previous studies, consistently supports the validity of Hick's theory that strikes are the result of bargaining errors, misperceptions of bargaining goals, or discrepancies between the expectations of union leaders and the rank and file. [source] The Moderating Effect of CEO Power on the Board Composition,Firm Performance Relationship*JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, Issue 8 2007James G. Combs abstract Prior studies of the relationship between the composition of boards of directors and firm performance offer equivocal results. Drawing on agency and power circulation theories, we attempt to reduce this equivocality by asserting that CEO power moderates the relationship. Specifically, an outside director dominated board is needed to check a powerful CEO, but monitoring by other executives provides sufficient constraints on CEOs with low power. We used event study methodology to test the effects of the interaction between board composition and CEO power on stock market reaction to 73 unexpected CEO deaths. We found support for our theorizing among two of three sources of CEO power. Thus, although regulatory trends increasingly support outside director dominated boards, our findings indicate that this may not always benefit shareholders and that CEO power should be considered when constructing boards. [source] STOCK MARKET REACTION TO GOOD AND BAD INFLATION NEWSTHE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL RESEARCH, Issue 2 2008Johan Knif Abstract This article shows that differentiating between good and bad inflation news is important to understanding how inflation affects stock market returns. Summing positive and negative inflation shocks as in previous studies tends to wash out or mute the effects of inflation news on stock returns. More specifically, we find that, depending on the economic state, positive and negative inflation shocks can produce a variety of stock market reactions. We conclude that the effect of inflation on stock returns is conditional on whether investors perceive inflation shocks as good or bad news in different economic states. [source] The Benefits of Banking Mega-Mergers: Event Study Evidence from the 1998 Failed Mega-Merger Attempts in CanadaCANADIAN JOURNAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, Issue 3 2003Ramon Baltazar We investigate the main benefit(s) of specific banking mega-mergers, and whether or not we can infer the benefit(s) from event study evidence of stock market reactions to the mega-mergers. In addressing these questions, we examine the market's reactions to three announcements surrounding the 1998 failed mega-merger attempts in the Canadian banking industry. From our analysis, we conclude that market power,not scale, scope, or X-eficiency economies, or access to government safety net subsidies,was the primary benefit ascribed by Canadian shareholders to the merger proposals. To the extent that the market's perception of merger benefits is an accurate indicator of the merging partners' motives, we also conclude that an analysis of shareholder reactions to a merger announcement,as undertaken here,is a productive avenue for regulators attempting to discern a particular merger's main motivations. Résumé Dans cette étude, nous examinons les avantages principaux de certaines méga-fusions bancaires. Nous nous demandons s'il est possible d'inférer ces avantages à partir de l'étude des réactions du marché boursier aux méga-fusions. Notre étude s'appuie sur les réactions du marché enregistrées à la suite de trois annonces, en 1998, de tentatives de méga-fusions avortées dans l'industrie bancaire canadienne. Notre analyse débouche sur la conclusion que le pouvoir du marché,et non son échelle, son étendue, l'efficacité de son économie (économies en efficacité X) ou l'accès au filet de sécurité des subventions gouvernementales,est le principal avantage que les actionnaires canadiens évoquent pour justifier les propositions de fusion. La perception des avantages de la fusion étant un indicateur clair des motivations des partenaires de la fusion, nous pensons qu'une analyse des réactions des actionnaires à l'annonce d'une fusion est une piste pertinente dans la détermination des principales raisons qui la sous-tendent. [source] | ||||||||||