IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudawp/127045.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bubbles or Convenience Yields? A Theoretical Explanation with Evidence from Technology Company Equity Carve-Outs

Author

Listed:
  • Bogan, Vicki

Abstract

This paper offers an alternative explanation for what is typically referred to as an asset pricing bubble. We develop a model that formalizes the Cochrane (2002) convenience yield theory of technology company stocks to explain why a rational agent would buy an “overpriced” security. Agents have a desire to trade but short-sale restrictions and other frictions limit their trading strategies and enable prices of two similar securities to be different. Thus, divergent prices for similar securities can be sustained in a rational expectations equilibrium. The paper also provides empirical support for the model using a sample of 1996 - 2000 equity carve-outs.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogan, Vicki, 2006. "Bubbles or Convenience Yields? A Theoretical Explanation with Evidence from Technology Company Equity Carve-Outs," Working Papers 127045, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127045
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.127045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/127045/files/Cornell_Dyson_wp0611.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.127045?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Owen A. Lamont & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Can the Market Add and Subtract? Mispricing in Tech Stock Carve-outs," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(2), pages 227-268, April.
    2. Harrison Hong & Jeremy C. Stein, 2003. "Differences of Opinion, Short-Sales Constraints, and Market Crashes," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 16(2), pages 487-525.
    3. Boudoukh, Jacob & Whitelaw, Robert F, 1993. "Liquidity as a Choice Variable: A Lesson from the Japanese Government Bond Market," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(2), pages 265-292.
    4. Allen F. & Morris S. & Postlewaite A., 1993. "Finite Bubbles with Short Sale Constraints and Asymmetric Information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 206-229, December.
    5. Glosten, Lawrence R. & Milgrom, Paul R., 1985. "Bid, ask and transaction prices in a specialist market with heterogeneously informed traders," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 71-100, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bogan, Vicki, 2009. "Bubbles or convenience yields? A theoretical explanation with evidence from technology company equity carve-outs," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 248-281, March.
    2. Brunnermeier, Markus K. & Oehmke, Martin, 2013. "Bubbles, Financial Crises, and Systemic Risk," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1221-1288, Elsevier.
    3. Harrison Hong & José Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2006. "Asset Float and Speculative Bubbles," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(3), pages 1073-1117, June.
    4. Harrison Hong & Jose Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2005. "Asset Float and Speculative Bubbles," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000861, UCLA Department of Economics.
    5. Jose M. Marin & Jacques P. Olivier, 2008. "The Dog That Did Not Bark: Insider Trading and Crashes," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(5), pages 2429-2476, October.
    6. Qin, Jie, 2015. "A model of regret, investor behavior, and market turbulence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 150-174.
    7. Hong Liu & Yajun Wang, 2019. "Asset Pricing Implications of Short-Sale Constraints in Imperfectly Competitive Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(9), pages 4422-4439, September.
    8. Alessandro Beber & Marco Pagano, 2013. "Short-Selling Bans Around the World: Evidence from the 2007–09 Crisis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 68(1), pages 343-381, February.
    9. Wenyuan Wang & Kaixin Yan & Xiang Yu, 2023. "Optimal Portfolio with Ratio Type Periodic Evaluation under Short-Selling Prohibition," Papers 2311.12517, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    10. Chen, Joseph & Hong, Harrison & Stein, Jeremy C., 2002. "Breadth of ownership and stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 171-205.
    11. Jank, Stephan & Roling, Christoph & Smajlbegovic, Esad, 2021. "Flying under the radar: The effects of short-sale disclosure rules on investor behavior and stock prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 209-233.
    12. Matthew Pritsker, 2005. "Large investors: implications for equilibrium asset, returns, shock absorption, and liquidity," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2005-36, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    13. Merl, Robert & Stöckl, Thomas & Palan, Stefan, 2023. "Insider trading regulation and shorting constraints. Evaluating the joint effects of two market interventions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    14. Amil Dasgupta & Andrea Prat & Michela Verardo, 2011. "The Price Impact of Institutional Herding," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(3), pages 892-925.
    15. Stephen L. Lenkey, 2021. "Informed Trading with a Short-Sale Prohibition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1803-1824, March.
    16. Dimitri Vayanos & Jiang Wang, 2012. "Market Liquidity -- Theory and Empirical Evidence," NBER Working Papers 18251, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Baker, Malcolm & Wurgler, Jeffrey & Yuan, Yu, 2012. "Global, local, and contagious investor sentiment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 272-287.
    18. Tibor Neugebauer & Sascha Füllbrunn, 2013. "Deflating Bubbles in Experimental Asset Markets: Comparative Statics of Margin Regulations," LSF Research Working Paper Series 13-14, Luxembourg School of Finance, University of Luxembourg.
    19. Bae, Kwangil & Kang, Jangkoo & Lee, Soonhee, 2016. "Bullish/bearish/neutral strategies under short sale restrictions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 227-239.
    20. Anufriev, Mikhail & Tuinstra, Jan, 2013. "The impact of short-selling constraints on financial market stability in a heterogeneous agents model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1523-1543.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacorus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.