The Experts below are selected from a list of 25437 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Luiz Antonio Joia - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
measuring intangible Corporate Assets
Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2000Co-Authors: Luiz Antonio JoiaAbstract:Since the beginning of this decade research has been conducted in order to define a feasible and reliable path to measure the intangible Assets of a company, also called its intellectual capital. Several models have been defined, though problems still remain to be solved. In this article a heuristic frame addressing the link between intellectual capital and business strategy is developed, according to the author’s proposed intangible Corporate Asset taxonomy. This model is then applied to a company within the magnesium industry. The “time‐lag trap” issue is presented showing the misconceptions arising from the static rather than the dynamic intangible Asset valuing approach. Future trends such as the creation of the IC elasticity concept and some conclusions in this realm are also presented.
-
measuring intangible Corporate Assets linking business strategy with intellectual capital
Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2000Co-Authors: Luiz Antonio JoiaAbstract:Since the beginning of this decade research has been conducted in order to define a feasible and reliable path to measure the intangible Assets of a company, also called its intellectual capital. Several models have been defined, though problems still remain to be solved. In this article a heuristic frame addressing the link between intellectual capital and business strategy is developed, according to the author’s proposed intangible Corporate Asset taxonomy. This model is then applied to a company within the magnesium industry. The “time‐lag trap” issue is presented showing the misconceptions arising from the static rather than the dynamic intangible Asset valuing approach. Future trends such as the creation of the IC elasticity concept and some conclusions in this realm are also presented.
Missaka Warusawitharana - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Corporate Asset purchases and sales: Theory and evidence☆
Journal of Financial Economics, 2008Co-Authors: Missaka WarusawitharanaAbstract:Abstract Purchases and sales of operating Assets by firms generated $162 billion for shareholders over the past 20 years. This contrasts sharply with the evidence on mergers. This paper characterizes the behavior of value-maximizing firms, which could grow organically, purchase existing Assets, or sell Assets. The approach yields an endogenous selection model that links Asset purchases and sales to fundamental properties of the firm. Empirical tests confirm the predictions of the model. In particular, return on Assets and size strongly predict when firms purchase or sell Assets, and the transaction size covaries with the value of capital employed by the firm. These findings indicate that Corporate Asset purchases and sales are consistent with efficient investment decisions.
Frederik P Schlingemann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the real effects of ratings actions evidence from Corporate Asset sales
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Dion Bongaerts, Frederik P SchlingemannAbstract:What is the relative contribution of credit rating downgrades on financial distress and managerial discipline? We find that firms are more likely to conduct Asset sales following a credit rating downgrade, particularly so if firms indicate the purpose is to use the proceeds to pay down outstanding debt or to raise cash. We find a smaller or no effect if the sale is motivated by concentrating on core Assets or involves the sale of a loss making or bankrupt operation. Shareholder wealth effects of the Asset sale following a credit rating downgrade are consistent with the event being perceived by the market as a successful mechanism by the seller to mitigate financial distress caused by the downgrade and where buyers benefit from discounted fire-sale prices and when the Assets have greater Asset redeployability. Asset sales following a downgrade are more likely to involve segments that are the most liquid, generate the least current cash flows, and have the highest growth opportunities. Peer-based performance, intrafirm performance, or relatedness to core activities, do not explain the choice for which segments are divested. Our results suggest that firms respond to credit rating downgrades with Asset sales in an attempt to reduce financial distress and that downgrades, at the margin, exacerbate financial distress rather than induce managerial discipline.
Murillo Campello - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
bankruptcy and the cost of organized labor evidence from union elections
2016Co-Authors: Murillo Campello, Janet Gao, Jiaping Qiu, Yue ZhangAbstract:Arguments that worker unionization leads to changes in productivity, employment, or business survival find little support in the literature. While unionization may have limited impact in good states, unionized workers are entitled to special treatment in bankruptcy court. This shift in bargaining power can be detrimental to other Corporate stakeholders in default states, with senior, unsecured creditors standing to lose the most. We gather data on union elections covering several decades and employ a regression discontinuity design to identify the effect of worker unionization on bondholders' wealth. Closely-won union elections lead to significant losses to bond values but do not lead to poorer firm performance or higher default risk. Critically, unionization is associated with longer proceedings in bankruptcy court, with more bankruptcy emergences and subsequent refilings, and with higher fees and expenses paid to lawyers and financial experts in court. All of these costs diminish Corporate Asset values, aggravating bondholders' losses. The value effect of unionization is weaker in states where unions have been undermined by right-to-work laws.
-
capital structure and the redeployability of tangible Assets
Research Papers in Economics, 2011Co-Authors: Murillo Campello, Erasmo GiambonaAbstract:We characterize the relation between Corporate Asset structure and capital structure by exploitingvariation in the salability of tangible Assets. Theory suggests that tangibility increases borrowingcapacity because it allows creditors to more easily repossess a firm’s Assets. Tangible Assets, however,are often illiquid. We show that the redeployability of tangible Assets is a main determinantof Corporate leverage. To establish this link, our analysis uses an instrumental variables approachthat inCorporates measures of supply and demand for various types of tangible Assets (e.g., machines,land, and buildings). Consistent with a credit supply-side view of capital structure, we find that Assetredeployability is a particularly important driver of leverage for firms that are likely to face creditfrictions (small, unrated firms). Our tests also show that Asset redeployability facilitates borrowingthe most during periods of tight credit. Our work contributes new evidence to capital structure modelsthat are based on contract incompleteness and limited enforceability. It does so characterizing awell-defined channel through which credit frictions affect firm financial decisions.
-
Capital structure and the redeployability of tangible Assets
2011Co-Authors: Murillo Campello, Erasmo GiambonaAbstract:We characterize the relation between Corporate Asset structure and capital structure by exploiting variation in the salability of tangible Assets. Theory suggests that tangibility increases borrowing capacity because it allows creditors to more easily repossess a firm's Assets. Tangible Assets, however, are often illiquid. We show that the redeployability of tangible Assets is a main determinant of Corporate leverage (beyond traditional measures of Asset tangibility). Our analysis uses an instrumental variables approach that inCorporates measures of supply and demand for various types of tangible Assets (e.g., machines, land, and buildings). Consistent with a credit supply-side view of capital structure, we find that Asset redeployability is a particularly important driver of leverage for firms that are likely to face credit frictions (small, unrated, and low payout firms). Additional tests show that Asset redeployability facilitates borrowing the most during periods of tight credit. Our work contributes new evidence to capital structure models that are based on contract incompleteness and limited enforceability. It does so characterizing a well-defined channel through which credit frictions affect firm financial decisions.
Erasmo Giambona - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
capital structure and the redeployability of tangible Assets
Research Papers in Economics, 2011Co-Authors: Murillo Campello, Erasmo GiambonaAbstract:We characterize the relation between Corporate Asset structure and capital structure by exploitingvariation in the salability of tangible Assets. Theory suggests that tangibility increases borrowingcapacity because it allows creditors to more easily repossess a firm’s Assets. Tangible Assets, however,are often illiquid. We show that the redeployability of tangible Assets is a main determinantof Corporate leverage. To establish this link, our analysis uses an instrumental variables approachthat inCorporates measures of supply and demand for various types of tangible Assets (e.g., machines,land, and buildings). Consistent with a credit supply-side view of capital structure, we find that Assetredeployability is a particularly important driver of leverage for firms that are likely to face creditfrictions (small, unrated firms). Our tests also show that Asset redeployability facilitates borrowingthe most during periods of tight credit. Our work contributes new evidence to capital structure modelsthat are based on contract incompleteness and limited enforceability. It does so characterizing awell-defined channel through which credit frictions affect firm financial decisions.
-
Capital structure and the redeployability of tangible Assets
2011Co-Authors: Murillo Campello, Erasmo GiambonaAbstract:We characterize the relation between Corporate Asset structure and capital structure by exploiting variation in the salability of tangible Assets. Theory suggests that tangibility increases borrowing capacity because it allows creditors to more easily repossess a firm's Assets. Tangible Assets, however, are often illiquid. We show that the redeployability of tangible Assets is a main determinant of Corporate leverage (beyond traditional measures of Asset tangibility). Our analysis uses an instrumental variables approach that inCorporates measures of supply and demand for various types of tangible Assets (e.g., machines, land, and buildings). Consistent with a credit supply-side view of capital structure, we find that Asset redeployability is a particularly important driver of leverage for firms that are likely to face credit frictions (small, unrated, and low payout firms). Additional tests show that Asset redeployability facilitates borrowing the most during periods of tight credit. Our work contributes new evidence to capital structure models that are based on contract incompleteness and limited enforceability. It does so characterizing a well-defined channel through which credit frictions affect firm financial decisions.
