IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/finmgt/v40y2011i2p427-453.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Larger Lenders Obtain Higher Returns: Evidence from Sovereign Syndicated Loans

Author

Listed:
  • Issam Hallak
  • Paul Schure

Abstract

Lenders that fund larger shares of a syndicated loan typically receive larger percentage upfront fees than smaller lenders. This paper studies sovereign syndicated loan contracts in the period 1982-2006 to explore this fact. In our dataset of 288 contracts large lenders obtain on average an 8.5 percent higher return on their funds than small lenders who join the syndicate. Our analysis shows that the return premium large lenders receive is positively affected by anticipated future liquidity problems of the borrower and by the number of banks. Our analysis also reveals that the return premium is not used to control the number of banks that join the syndicate. We interpret our findings as indicating that the fee structure on syndicated loans incorporates anticipated costs associated with a borrower illiquidity, notably the costs of coordinating the workout and providing liquidity insurance, but that the fee structure does not serve the additional purpose of curbing these costs by reducing the number of lenders in the syndicate.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Issam Hallak & Paul Schure, 2011. "Why Larger Lenders Obtain Higher Returns: Evidence from Sovereign Syndicated Loans," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 40(2), pages 427-453, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:finmgt:v:40:y:2011:i:2:p:427-453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eaton, Jonathan & Fernandez, Raquel, 1995. "Sovereign debt," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 3, pages 2031-2077, Elsevier.
    2. Antje Brunner & Jan Pieter Krahnen, 2008. "Multiple Lenders and Corporate Distress: Evidence on Debt Restructuring," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(2), pages 415-442.
    3. Cole, Harold L & Dow, James & English, William B, 1995. "Default, Settlement, and Signalling: Lending Resumption in a Reputational Model of Sovereign Debt," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 36(2), pages 365-385, May.
    4. Ongena, Steven & Smith, David C., 2000. "What Determines the Number of Bank Relationships? Cross-Country Evidence," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 26-56, January.
    5. Elsas, Ralf & Krahnen, Jan Pieter, 1998. "Is relationship lending special? Evidence from credit-file data in Germany," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(10-11), pages 1283-1316, October.
    6. Carletti, Elena, 2004. "The structure of bank relationships, endogenous monitoring, and loan rates," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 58-86, January.
    7. Galina Hale, 2007. "Bonds or Loans? the Effect of Macroeconomic Fundamentals," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(516), pages 196-215, January.
    8. Machauer, Achim & Weber, Martin, 2000. "Number of bank relationships: An indicator of competition, borrower quality, or just size?," CFS Working Paper Series 2000/06, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    9. Bharath, Sreedhar & Dahiya, Sandeep & Saunders, Anthony & Srinivasan, Anand, 2007. "So what do I get? The bank's view of lending relationships," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 368-419, August.
    10. Bulow, Jeremy & Rogoff, Kenneth, 1989. "Sovereign Debt: Is to Forgive to Forget?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(1), pages 43-50, March.
    11. Gupta, Anurag & Singh, Ajai K. & Zebedee, Allan A., 2008. "Liquidity in the pricing of syndicated loans," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 339-376, November.
    12. Evan Gatev & Philip Strahan, 2008. "Liquidity Risk and Syndicate Structure," NBER Working Papers 13802, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Morris, Stephen & Shin, Hyun Song, 2004. "Coordination risk and the price of debt," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 133-153, February.
    14. Amir Sufi, 2007. "Information Asymmetry and Financing Arrangements: Evidence from Syndicated Loans," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(2), pages 629-668, April.
    15. William Wilhelm & Pegaret Pichler, 2001. "A Theory of the Syndicate: Form Follows Function," Economics Series Working Papers 2001-FE-05, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    16. Anthony Coleman & Neil Esho & Ian Sharpe, 2006. "Does Bank Monitoring Influence Loan Contract Terms?," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 30(2), pages 177-198, October.
    17. Elsas, Ralf, 2005. "Empirical determinants of relationship lending," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 32-57, January.
    18. Rose, Andrew K., 2005. "One reason countries pay their debts: renegotiation and international trade," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 189-206, June.
    19. Ciarlone, Alessio & Piselli, Paolo & Trebeschi, Giorgio, 2009. "Emerging markets' spreads and global financial conditions," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 222-239, April.
    20. G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), 1995. "Handbook of International Economics," Handbook of International Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    21. Jonathan Eaton & Mark Gersovitz, 1981. "Debt with Potential Repudiation: Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(2), pages 289-309.
    22. Patrick Bolton & Xavier Freixas, 2000. "Equity, Bonds, and Bank Debt: Capital Structure and Financial Market Equilibrium under Asymmetric Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(2), pages 324-351, April.
    23. Eichengreen, Barry & Mody, Ashoka, 2000. "Lending booms, reserves and the sustainability of short-term debt: inferences from the pricing of syndicated bank loans," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 5-44, October.
    24. Preece, Dianna & Mullineaux, Donald J., 1996. "Monitoring, loan renegotiability, and firm value: The role of lending syndicates," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 577-593, April.
    25. Dennis, Steven A. & Mullineaux, Donald J., 2000. "Syndicated Loans," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 404-426, October.
    26. Sharpe, Steven A, 1990. "Asymmetric Information, Bank Lending, and Implicit Contracts: A Stylized Model of Customer Relationships," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(4), pages 1069-1087, September.
    27. Block, Steven A. & Vaaler, Paul M., 2004. "The price of democracy: sovereign risk ratings, bond spreads and political business cycles in developing countries," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 917-946, October.
    28. Grossman, Herschel I. & Han, Taejoon, 1999. "Sovereign debt and consumption smoothing," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 149-158, August.
    29. Diamond, Douglas W & Verrecchia, Robert E, 1991. "Disclosure, Liquidity, and the Cost of Capital," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1325-1359, September.
    30. Bolton, Patrick & Scharfstein, David S, 1996. "Optimal Debt Structure and the Number of Creditors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 1-25, February.
    31. Hallak, Issam, 2009. "Renegotiation and the pricing structure of sovereign bank loans: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 89-103, January.
    32. Lee, Suk Hun, 1991. "Ability and willingness to service debt as explanation for commercial and official rescheduling cases," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 5-27, February.
    33. Boot, Arnoud W. A., 2000. "Relationship Banking: What Do We Know?," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 7-25, January.
    34. Petersen, Mitchell A & Rajan, Raghuram G, 1994. "The Benefits of Lending Relationships: Evidence from Small Business Data," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(1), pages 3-37, March.
    35. Pegaret Pichler & William Wilhelm, 2001. "A Theory of the Syndicate: Form Follows Function," OFRC Working Papers Series 2001fe05, Oxford Financial Research Centre.
    36. Pegaret Pichler & William Wilhelm, 2001. "A Theory of the Syndicate: Form Follows Function," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(6), pages 2237-2264, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hallak, Issam, 2013. "Private sector share of external debt and financial stability: Evidence from bank loans," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 17-41.

    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. Hallak, Issam, 2002. "Why borrowers pay premiums to larger lenders: Empirical evidence from sovereign syndicated loans," CFS Working Paper Series 2002/02, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    2. Ongena, Steven & Tümer-Alkan, Günseli & Westernhagen, Natalja v., 2012. "Creditor concentration: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 830-847.
    3. Doris Neuberger & Solvig Räthke, 2009. "Microenterprises and multiple bank relationships: The case of professionals," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 207-229, February.
    4. Carbó-Valverde, Santiago & Cuadros-Solas, Pedro J. & Rodríguez-Fernández, Francisco, 2021. "The impact of lending relationships on the choice and structure of bond underwriting syndicates," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    5. Hallak, Issam, 2003. "Bank loans non-linear structure of pricing: Empirical evidence from sovereign debts," CFS Working Paper Series 2003/33, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    6. Christina Bannier, 2007. "Heterogeneous multiple bank financing: does it reduce inefficient credit-renegotiation incidences?," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 21(4), pages 445-470, December.
    7. Gajewski, Krzysztof & Pawłowska, Małgorzata & Rogowski, Wojciech, 2012. "Relacje firm z bankami w Polsce w świetle danych ze sprawozdawczości bankowej [Bank-firm relationships in Poland in the light of data from bank reporting]," MPRA Paper 42544, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 29 Oct 2012.
    8. Allen N. Berger & William Goulding & Tara N. Rice, 2013. "Do Small Businesses Still Prefer Community Banks?," International Finance Discussion Papers 1096, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Ralf Elsas & Frank Heinemann & Marcel Tyrell, 2004. "Multiple but Asymmetric Bank Financing: The Case of Relationship Lending," Working Paper Series: Finance and Accounting 141, Department of Finance, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main.
    10. Berger, Allen N. & Goulding, William & Rice, Tara, 2014. "Do small businesses still prefer community banks?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 264-278.
    11. Berger, Allen N. & Klapper, Leora F. & Martinez Peria, Maria Soledad & Zaidi, Rida, 2008. "Bank ownership type and banking relationships," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 37-62, January.
    12. Jian Cai, 2009. "Competition or collaboration? The reciprocity effect in loan syndication," Working Papers (Old Series) 0909, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    13. Belaid, Faiçal & Boussaada, Rim & Belguith, Houda, 2017. "Bank-firm relationship and credit risk: An analysis on Tunisian firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 532-543.
    14. Ghosh, Chinmoy & He, Fan, 2023. "The impact of laws and institutions on financial contracts: Evidence from relationship lending across the world," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    15. Kamphol Panyagometh & Gordon S. Roberts, 2010. "Do Lead Banks Exploit Syndicate Participants? Evidence from Ex Post Risk," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(1), pages 273-299, March.
    16. Hallak, Issam, 2009. "Renegotiation and the pricing structure of sovereign bank loans: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 89-103, January.
    17. Jarko Fidrmuc & Philipp Schreiber & Martin Siddiqui, 2018. "Intangible Assets and the Determinants of a Single Bank Relation of German SMEs," European Journal of Business Science and Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Faculty of Business and Economics, vol. 4(1), pages 5-30.
    18. Antje Brunner & Jan Pieter Krahnen, 2013. "Hold-up in multiple banking: evidence from SME lending," International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1/2), pages 78-101.
    19. Luigi Guiso & Raoul Minetti, 2010. "The Structure of Multiple Credit Relationships: Evidence from U.S. Firms," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(6), pages 1037-1071, September.
    20. Adamuz, María de las Mercedes & Hernández Cortés, Janko, 2015. "Endogenous screening and the formation of loan syndicates," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 290-307.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F34 - International Economics - - International Finance - - - International Lending and Debt Problems
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:finmgt:v:40:y:2011:i:2:p:427-453. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmaaaea.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.