Gomes and Livdan (2004) The authors use a formal dynamic model of a value maximizing firm to show that the main empirical findings about firm diversification.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Review of Exam 1.
Advertisements

Correcting Market Distortions: Shadow Prices, Shadow Wages and Discount Rates Chapter 6.
Chapter 11 Optimal Portfolio Choice
The Demand for Labor The Demand for Labor The demand for labor is a derived demand. Employer’s demand for labor is a function of the characteristics of.
Factor Markets and the Distribution of Income
 3M is expected to pay paid dividends of $1.92 per share in the coming year.  You expect the stock price to be $85 per share at the end of the year.
Villalonga (2004) Lang and Stulz (1994), Berger and Ofek (1995), and Servaes (1996) find that diversified firms trade at an average discount relative to.
Behavioral Finance and Asset Pricing What effect does psychological bias (irrationality) have on asset demands and asset prices?
Neoclassical Growth Theory
Chapter Nine The Rise and Fall of Industries. 9 | 2 Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Markets and Industries Industry – A group.
Hanken Svenska handelshögskolan / Hanken School of Economics Customer Portfolios Customer Equity Helsinki Summer School 2009, Hanken Andreas.
Diversification and Portfolio Management (Ch. 8)
Chapter 17 Unemployment, Inflation, and Growth. 2 Introduction In Chapter 4, 5, 6, we have studied a classical model of the complete economy, but said.
Endogenous Technological Change Slide 1 Endogenous Technological Change Schumpeterian Growth Theory By Paul Romer.
Macroeconomics Chapter 91 Capital Utilization and Unemployment C h a p t e r 9.
Interest Rates Fin 200.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005 CAPITAL ACCUMULATION AND GROWTH: THE BASIC SOLOW MODEL Chapter 3 – first lecture Introducing Advanced Macroeconomics:
L9: Consumption, Saving, and Investments 1 Lecture 9: Consumption, Saving, and Investments The following topics will be covered: –Consumption and Saving.
Chapter 11 Multiple Regression.
Lecture 4: The Demand for Labor
Consumption, Saving, and Investment
Lecture 12 International Portfolio Theory and Diversification.
Managing in Perfectly Competitive and Monopolistic Markets
Small is good? Small cap investing Aswath Damodaran.
SESSION 19A: PRIVATE COMPANY VALUATION Aswath Damodaran 1.
ECON 6012 Cost Benefit Analysis Memorial University of Newfoundland
1 Finance School of Management Chapter 13: The Capital Asset Pricing Model Objective The Theory of the CAPM Use of CAPM in benchmarking Using CAPM to determine.
© 2005 Worth Publishers Slide 12-1 CHAPTER 12 Factor Markets and the Distribution of Income PowerPoint® Slides by Can Erbil and Gustavo Indart © 2005 Worth.
ECNE610 Managerial Economics APRIL Dr. Mazharul Islam Chapter-6.
An Alternative View of Risk and Return: The Arbitrage Pricing Theory Chapter 12 Copyright © 2010 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
DEVELOPING STRATEGIES FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Session 8 Diversification Strategy Session 8 Diversification Strategy 1.
Alternative Measures of Risk. The Optimal Risk Measure Desirable Properties for Risk Measure A risk measure maps the whole distribution of one dollar.
Accounting Principles, Ninth Edition
Perfect Competition *MADE BY RACHEL STAND* :). I. Perfect Competition: A Model A. Basic Definitions 1. Perfect Competition: a model of the market based.
M. Velucchi, A. Viviani, A. Zeli New York University and European University of Rome Università di Firenze ISTAT Roma, November 21, 2011 DETERMINANTS OF.
Ch 4 THE THEORY OF PRODUCTION
Monetary Policy and Exchange Rate Pass-through: Theory and Evidence Michael B. Devereux and James Yetman.
Chapter 26 Part 1.
Trade: Factor Availability and Factor Proportions Are Key
CHAPTER 6 CORPORATE-LEVEL STRATEGY
Portfolio Theory Chapter 7
Capter 16 Output and Aggregate Demand 1 Chapter 16: Begg, Vernasca, Fischer, Dornbusch (2012).McGraw Hill.
1 Long-Run Economic Growth and Rising Living Standards Economic Growth.
Diversification Ricardian Rents, and Tobin's q Presented by: Sandra Corredor Cynthia Montgomery Northwestern - Harvard RAND Journal of Economics (1988)
1 Chapter 13: The Capital Asset Pricing Model Copyright © Prentice Hall Inc Author: Nick Bagley, bdellaSoft, Inc. Objective The Theory of the CAPM.
Relation of Liquidity Preference Framework to Loanable Funds Keynes’s Major Assumption Two Categories of Assets in Wealth MoneyBonds 1.Thus:M s + B s =
Investment and portfolio management MGT 531.  MGT 531   Lecture # 16.
Capital Asset Pricing Model CAPM I: The Theory. Introduction Asset Pricing – how assets are priced? Equilibrium concept Portfolio Theory – ANY individual.
The Industry Life-Cycle and Acquisitions and Investment: Does Firm Organization Matter? Vojislav Maksimovic Gordon Phillips University of Maryland.
Bond Valuation Professor Thomas Chemmanur. 2 Bond Valuation A bond represents borrowing by firms from investors. F  Face Value of the bond (sometimes.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2005 CAPITAL ACCUMULATION AND GROWTH: THE BASIC SOLOW MODEL Chapter 3 – second lecture Introducing Advanced Macroeconomics:
Chapter McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Risk and Capital Budgeting 13.
Generalised method of moments approach to testing the CAPM Nimesh Mistry Filipp Levin.
Topic 8 Aggregate Demand I: Building the IS-LM model
Copyright © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. Chapter 9 A Real Intertemporal Model with Investment.
1 Estimating Return and Risk Chapter 7 Jones, Investments: Analysis and Management.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved CHAPTER 11 An Alternative View of Risk and Return The Arbitrage.
Diversifiction, Ricardian Rents, and Tobin’s q (Montgomery and Wernerfelt 1988) Group 1 Meredith, Barclay, Woo-je, and Kumar.
Corporate Strategy Team 3 – 001. Business Strategy  Competitive Advantage  How should we compete? Corporate Strategy  Industry Attractiveness  Scope.
Introduction to Economics of Water Resources. Public or private Excludability (E): the degree to which users can be excluded Subtractability (S): the.
The Capital Asset Pricing Model Lecture XII. .Literature u Most of today’s materials comes from Eugene F. Fama and Merton H. Miller The Theory of Finance.
Corporate Diversification and Long-run Performance of SEO Firms --Evidence from Taiwan-- Jeng-Ren Chiou Ming-Yuan Li Ting-Kai Chou Chao-Ya Wan.
Chapter 12 – Single Investment Risk Analysis u Reasons for looking at risk from a single project prospective u lack comprehensive knowledge u of the rest.
> > > > The Behavior of Profit-Maximizing Firms Profits and Economic Costs Short-Run Versus Long-Run Decisions The Bases of Decisions: Market Price of.
EF310: International Trade and Business Lecture 17 Theories of International Trade.
Industry Analysis ch13. Why Do Industry Analysis?  The Purpose:  Help find profitable investment opportunities  Part of the three-step, top-down plan.
Industrial Structure and Capital Flows
Diversification Strategy
Macroeconomics Chapter 9
Presentation transcript:

Gomes and Livdan (2004) The authors use a formal dynamic model of a value maximizing firm to show that the main empirical findings about firm diversification and performance are consistent with value maximization In the model, diversification allows a firm to explore better productive opportunities while taking advantage of synergies; a “diversification discount” is observed even though diversification itself does not destroy value The main competing explanations for the facts are based on agency theory, but the authors point out that agency-based explanations lack solid theoretical foundations (why do owners tolerate such obvious value-reducing actions?) and are difficult to test directly; support for the agency view typically comes from the perceived failure of alternatives

The Model In the model, firms diversify for two reasons: 1.Diversification allows firms to exploit economies of scope by eliminating redundancies across activities and reducing fixed costs 2.Diversification allows a mature slow-growing firm to explore attractive new productive opportunities Using numerical computations, the model generates an artificial cross sectional distribution of firms; the authors compare results obtained from this artificial data to real data The model predicts that diversified firms have, on average, a lower Tobin’s q than focused firms, as documented by Lang and Stulz (1994) The intuition is that firms diversify only when they become relatively unproductive in their current activities

Contributions to the Literature Some other recent work such as Matsusaka (2001) and Maksimovic and Phillips (2002) also analyzes diversification using models of profit maximizing firms However, conglomerate firms in these models are still endowed with lower profit opportunities than specialized firms; Matsusaka models diversification as an intermediate less productive search stage and Maksimovic and Phillips assume that firms must incur extra costs when they produce in more than one industry In the authors’ model conglomerates are not assumed to be ex ante less efficient The model endogenously links productivity, size, and valuations to diversification strategies in a fully specified general equilibrium environment and generates artificial data; a key strength is this close relation to observable facts

Formal Structure Real firms differ in several ways: size, growth, investment, diversification; the model must produce such a cross section of firms The economy consists of households and firms, but the model focuses on the firms, who produce a consumption good Households are summarized by a single representative consumer making optimal consumption and portfolio decisions Time is discrete and the horizon is infinite There are two separate industries; each period firms can either be focused in sector 1 or 2 or operate in both (which is denoted by 3) Firms who are focused in period t cannot simply switch industries in period t + 1; they must either remain as they are or diversify Diversified firms can remain diversified or become focused in either industry

Production

Productivity and Capacity

Timing 1.Every firm arrives at period t with its capacity and immediately observes its productivity levels in both sectors 2.Then the firm decides which sectors to operate in 3.Then the firm allocates capital and labor across its activities 4.Then the firm decides how much to invest, which determines its capacity the following period

Profits

Discussion In reality, synergies are created through the elimination of redundancies across business lines, such as overhead In the model, “synergies” are captured by the savings parameter lambda, which generates a form of economies of scope and creates a benefit to diversification that cannot be replicated by shareholders This is a key departure from the literature: in this model conglomerates create value for investors, and the diversification discount is driven entirely by the endogenous nature of the diversification decision The model assumes decreasing returns to scale in each sector; as the firm grows in size, marginal productivities fall and it becomes unprofitable for the firm to continue to invest in its existing activities Instead, the firm explores new opportunities Thus, large firms are more likely to become diversified, as in reality

Discussion Conglomerates also benefit from two other features in the model: 1.They have more options than focused firms because focused firms cannot simply switch industries 2.Since the productivity shocks are not perfectly correlated, diversification allows a firm to explore alternative profit opportunities and lower exposure to cash flow risk. However, this feature is not valued by investors in general equilibrium because they can diversify their portfolio Thus, in the author’s model, production is more efficient and resources are saved when operations are combined into a conglomerate This ensures that the model does not generate a diversification discount directly from its assumptions; the discount is generated endogenously from self-selection

Optimality

Propositions

Corollaries

Aggregation

Demand, Labor Supply, and General Equilibrium

Calibration Computing the stationary equilibrium requires parameter values that must be selected to be consistent with either long-run properties of the data (unconditional first moments) or with prior empirical evidence Since most data is available at an annual frequency, they assume that a time period in the model corresponds to one year They use independent evidence on the degree of returns to scale to set the output elasticities at.65 (labor) and.3 (capital) The rate of depreciation of the capital stock is set to.1 The four remaining parameters cannot be individually identified from the available data; they are chosen so that the model is able to approximate the unconditional moments from the panel studied by Lang and Stulz (1994) (cross-sectional mean and dispersion of Tobin’s q, the fraction of diversified firms, the average level of q for conglomerates; the main stylized facts are conditional moments, or regressions, from this panel)

Numerical Method Computing requires a numerical algorithm capable of approximating the stationary equilibrium The algorithm includes three steps: 1.Solving the firm’s problem and compute the optimal firm decision rules 2.Use the optimal decision rules and iterate to compute the stationary distribution 3.Compute aggregate quantities and use the market clearing condition to determine the equilibrium levels of consumption and labor The first step employs value function iteration on a discrete state space; the authors specify a grid with a finite number of points for the capital stock as well as a finite approximation to the normal random vector z

The Stationary Distribution

Iterations

Diversification Discount

Results The authors compare the results of estimating the regression using their model’s data to the empirical results of Lang and Stulz (1994) They report the means across 100 simulations for both their coefficients and t-statistics As in the real data, the model’s results show that diversified firms are discounted and the discount is statistically significant The model predicts a diversification discount that is quantitatively similar to that found in the real data The results are robust to excluding outliers with q greater than 5 The results suggest that selection is sufficient to explain the “diversification discount”; diversification in this model is optimal for those firms that diversify and breaking them up would destroy shareholder value If synergies are large enough, the discount can disappear; this may explain evidence that suggests that the magnitude of the discount varies with the level of synergies

Source of the Discount Following Lang and Stulz (1994), the authors report the results of several additional comparisons using their artificial data Estimating the regression for the subsample of firms that do not change the number of segments in which they operate (which excludes newly diversified and refocused firms) does not eliminate the observed discount (as in the data) There is some suggestion in the model and the data that diversifying firms experience drops in q and refocusing firms experience increases in q Recent empirical work suggests finds that firm spin-offs and divestitures tend to raise value while improving the quality of investment, and the model explains why this occurs: firms refocus when productivity shocks become more asymmetric, so divestitures are associated with increased productivity and investment in ongoing activities