Optimal Listing Strategy: Why Microsoft and Intel Do Not List on the NYSE
Many large firms have chosen not to list on the NYSE, despite meeting NYSE listing requirements. Dealer markets such as Nasdaq have higher quoted bid-ask spreads than auction markets like the NYSE. However, these higher spreads give broker-dealers an incentive to market a stock, expanding the pool of investors willing to hold the stock. Firms face a tradeoff between the low transaction costs of an auction market and the marketing advantages of a dealer market. New technologies allow institutional investors to bypass dealers, making it possible for large firms to have the best of both worlds: The dealer network markets the stock to retail investors while institutions have low transaction costs. The model also explains why firms can have positive price reactions when they switch from Nasdaq to AMEX and also when they move from Nasdaq to AMEX. Furthermore, the model is consistent with the curious fact that closed-end funds, unlike other firms, overwhelmingly list on exchanges, and that brokerage firms tend to list their own stocks on exchanges even while bringing other firms public on Nasdaq.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" 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.
|Date of creation:|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:gesbwp:_007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.