Partnership fragility and credit costs
AbstractEconomic teams, including the business partnership, are created to exploit gains from cooperation, but teams also fall prey to shirking and other opportunistic behaviors, which lead to their dissolution. If team production is partly financed with debt, the untimely dissolution of partnerships exposes creditors to default risks that they will price into debt contracts. This paper explores these two features of the nineteenth-century business partnership and finds: (1) partnerships were short-lived teams (two years or less, on average) and larger partnerships were shorter-lived yet; and (2) compared to proprietorship, partnerships paid higher interest rates on short-term debt, after controlling for loan size, maturity, and other observable features. Although there were potential gains from team production, potential opportunism raised the costs of partnerships.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 16689.
Date of creation: Jan 2011
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General
- N21 - Economic History - - Financial Markets and Institutions - - - U.S.; Canada: Pre-1913
- N41 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - U.S.; Canada: Pre-1913
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Beck, Thorsten & Demirguc-Kunt, Asli & Levine, Ross, 2003.
"Law and finance: why does legal origin matter?,"
Journal of Comparative Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 653-675, December.
- Thorsten Beck & Asli Demirguc-Kunt & Ross Levine, 2002. "Law and Finance: why Does Legal Origin Matter?," NBER Working Papers 9379, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Beck, T.H.L. & Demirgüç-Kunt , A. & Levine, R., 2003. "Law and finance: Why does legal origin matter?," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-3125511, Tilburg University.
- Beck, Thorsten & Demirguc-Kunt, Asli & Levine, Ross, 2002. "Law and finance : why does legal origin matter?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2904, The World Bank.
- Wang, Ta-Chen, 2008. "Banks, Credit Markets, and Early American Development: A Case Study of Entry and Competition," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(02), pages 438-461, June.
- Howard Bodenhorn, 2002. "Partnership and Hold-Up in Early America," NBER Working Papers 8814, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bodenhorn, Howard, 1999. "An Engine of Growth: Real Bills and Schumpeterian Banking in Antebellum New York," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 278-302, July.
- Graeme G. Acheson & John D. Turner, 2006. "The impact of limited liability on ownership and control: Irish banking, 1877-1914 -super-1," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 59(2), pages 320-346, 05.
- Bodenhorn, Howard, 2007. "Usury ceilings and bank lending behavior: Evidence from nineteenth century New York," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 179-202, April.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.