1468-5957/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=d68ba176d00932545c79f6d06c185d7a125200df "Journal of Business Finance & Accounting")
The authors are from the Faculty of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. They would like to thank the editor and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
1468-5957/asset/JBFA_centre.gif?v=1&s=5da49dcf12df1cd6d07423521df0419ebf8be461)
A POSSIBLE RECONCILIATION OF SOME OF THE CONFLICTING FINDINGS ON CLOSED-END FUND DISCOUNTS: A NOTE
Article first published online: 7 DEC 2006
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1994.tb00363.x
Additional Information
How to Cite
Deaves, R. and Krinsky, I. (1994), A POSSIBLE RECONCILIATION OF SOME OF THE CONFLICTING FINDINGS ON CLOSED-END FUND DISCOUNTS: A NOTE. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 21: 1047–1057. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1994.tb00363.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 7 DEC 2006
- Article first published online: 7 DEC 2006
- (Paper received November 1992, accepted December 1992)
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
The most obvious explanation for the closed-end fund puzzle, the existence of managerial contribution (i.e., managerial performance less managerial fees), has been called into disrepute because of the inability of researchers to consistently document a negative relationship between such benefits and discounts. We present a model which shows that it is possible to account for some of the stylized facts without abandoning market efficiency and rationality. It is suggested that when one takes into consideration the impact of managerial contribution on the probability of open-ending, a negative relationship between managerial contribution and discounts actually may result.