¬ã°Q¤é´Á |
2010¦~06¤ë19¤é
10:20 ~ 13:00 |
||
¬ã°Q¦aÂI |
¥xÆW¤j¾ÇªÀ·|¬ì¾Ç°| ²Ä26±Ð«Ç |
||
°Q½×ÃD¥Ø |
ÃD¥Ø |
§@ªÌ |
¤åÄm¥X³B |
Optimal
Cross Holding with Externalities and Strategic Interactions |
Matthew J. Clayton and Bjorn N. Jorgensen |
Journal of Business, 2005, vol.78,
no. 4 pp.1505-1522 |
|
³ø§i¤H |
Áé暳³® |
||
°Ñ¥[¤Hû |
¶ÀÂE ±ç¤åºa ³¯§»©ö ªL¿P²Q ²ø´_½å ¼B«G§g °ª°ê®p ±ä¥j¾s ´¿ÀRªK ¤ý¬ý³Ç ½²©úªÚ ±i·ç¶³ ³\²Q媖 ±i¥Á©¾ Ò\¥ú»õ®}¹t ´^¥¿¯E ¤Bi¤¯ Áé暳³® ¬IÎr¥þ ªL®Ë¦p ³¯ª÷²± |
||
°Q½×´£n |
Cross holding, defined as one firm having
an equity position (long or short) in another firm, arises in various
industries. This paper analyzes the role of cross holding among publicly
traded firms that generate externalities. We analyze a two period setting
where firms first choose equity positions in each other and second engage in
operating activities that cause externalities. |
||
°Q½×µ²ªG»P«ØÄ³ |
Firms facing positive
externalities optimally choose long equity positions to increase their
profits. Firms facing negative externalities encounter a prisoner¡¦ dilemma, where each firm optimally chooses short positions in
the first period, committing to a more aggressive operating stance that
results in lower profits. In contrast to the prior literature, regulation
restricting cross holdings reduces consumer surplus and economic welfare when
the number of firms is fixed. However, such regulation can increase entry ,
improving new welfare. ©µ¦ù ªu¥Î¦¹½g¥H¡§«ùªÑ¤è¦¡¶i¦æ²§·~µ²·ù¡¨ªº·§©À»P·f°â«áµ²·ù¼t°Ó´£¨Ñ§é¦©ªºÄ³ÃD¶i¦æµ²¦X¡A¥H¸ÑÄÀ¹q«H¨t²Î°Ó»P³q¸ô¥N²z°Óªºµ²·ùÁͶաA¶i¤@¨B¤ÀªR¼t°Ó¥æ¤e«ùªÑ¦p¦ó¼vÅT·f°â«áªº§é¦©¤Î·f°â¤U¼t°Óªºµ²·ù¦æ¬°¹ïªÀ·|ºÖ§Qªº¼vÅT¡C |
||
³Æµù |
|
|
|