IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jnlbus/v66y1993i4p499-516.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Bondholders Lose from Junk Bond Covenant Changes

Author

Listed:
  • Kahan, Marcel
  • Tuckman, Bruce

Abstract

This article documents that firms can and do change the covenants of their public debt indentures through consent solicitations. A game-theoretic model shows that bondholders may consent to covenant changes even when it is not in their collective interest to do so. Despite this finding, bondholder returns around solicitations are positive. Further analysis indicates that bondholders coordinate their actions to modify or defeat disadvantageous proposals and, therefore, can demand some of the gains resulting from covenant modifications. The policy implication of this study is that bondholders may not need additional regulatory or judicial protection in the solicitation process. Copyright 1993 by University of Chicago Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Kahan, Marcel & Tuckman, Bruce, 1993. "Do Bondholders Lose from Junk Bond Covenant Changes," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66(4), pages 499-516, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jnlbus:v:66:y:1993:i:4:p:499-516
    DOI: 10.1086/296615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/296615
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/296615?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jamie A. Anderson-Parson & Terrill R. Keasler & Robin T. Byerly, 2015. "Bond Indenture Consent Solicitations as a Debt Management Tool," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, July.
    2. Hege, U. & Mella-Barral, P., 1999. "Collateral, Renegotiation and the Value of Diffusely Held Debt," Discussion Paper 1999-94, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Mann, Steven V. & Powers, Eric A., 2007. "Determinants of bond tender premiums and the percentage tendered," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 547-566, March.
    4. Zhang, Zhipeng, 2009. "Recovery Rates and Macroeconomic Conditions: The Role of Loan Covenants," MPRA Paper 17521, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Hege, Ulrich, 2003. "Workouts, court-supervised reorganization and the choice between private and public debt," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 233-269, March.
    6. Chatterjee, Sris & Dhillon, Upinder S. & Ramirez, Gabriel G., 1995. "Coercive tender and exchange offers in distressed high-yield debt restructurings An empirical analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 333-360, July.
    7. Billett, Matthew T. & Yang, Ke, 2016. "Bond tender offers in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 128-141.
    8. de Jong, Abe & Roosenboom, Peter & Schramade, Willem, 2009. "Who benefits from bond tender offers in Europe?," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 355-369, December.
    9. Maul, D. & Schiereck, D., 2017. "The bond event study methodology since 1974," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 80723, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    10. Reisel, Natalia, 2014. "On the value of restrictive covenants: Empirical investigation of public bond issues," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 251-268.
    11. repec:mul:jdp901:doi:10.12831/73633:y:2013:i:1:p:51-65 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Michelle J. White, 2005. "Economic Analysis of Corporate and Personal Bankruptcy Law," NBER Working Papers 11536, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Armando Gomes, 2024. "Takeovers, Freezeouts, and Risk Arbitrage," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, January.
    14. Flavio Bazzana & Eleonora Broccardo, 2013. "The role of bondholder coordination in freeze-out exchange offers," Journal of Financial Management, Markets and Institutions, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 1, pages 67-84, January.
    15. Armo Gomes, 2001. "Takeovers, Freezeouts, and Risk Arbitrage," Penn CARESS Working Papers c4679b705ea88aebda985c6da, Penn Economics Department.
    16. Daniels, Kenneth & Ramirez, Gabriel G., 2007. "Debt restructurings, holdouts, and exit consents," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 1-17, April.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jnlbus:v:66:y:1993:i:4:p:499-516. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.jstor.org/journal/jbusiness .

    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.