Previous research suggests that firms choose negotiated issuance over competitive despite its apparently higher net interest cost. This result is shown to arise partly from failure to correct for a selectivity bias in the choice of issuance procedures. Two stage analysis is used in a model that includes qualitative and limited dependent variables to re-estimate the net interest cost difference between competitive and negotiated issues. Results support the hypothesis that the choice of issuance procedure is consistent with shareholder wealth maximization. Examination of debt issues subject to Rule 50 of the Public Utility Holding Company Act indicates that the regulation, as applied, is not effective.
If you can't find a tool you're looking for, please click the link at the top of the page to "Go to old article view". Alternatively, view our Knowledge Base articles for additional help. Your feedback is important to us, so please let us know if you have comments or ideas for improvement.