MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2280127685

Gresham's Law in Corporate Finance

2013· article· en· W2280127685 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon S. Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of financial perspectives · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeigniorageEconomicsMonetary economicsEquity (law)FinanceBusinessCurrencyFinancial systemLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financing patterns in corporate takeovers and private equity deals over the last twenty years demonstrate the widespread application of Rolnick and Weber’s (1986) extension of one of the most venerable principles of monetary economics: Gresham’s Law. Two currencies, corporate securities (bad money) and cash (good money) circulate together with the former playing the dominant role of par money in times when investors exhibit irrational enthusiasm. Heightened social pressure in the form of herding combined with greater uncertainty about the degree and duration of the overvaluation of securities jointly play the role of transactions costs creating a preference for payment in the par money and most deals are financed with equity or debt securities rather than cash. To illustrate, overvalued bank loans were the most common form of financing in the credit bubble up to 2008 while stock deals predominated in takeover financing during the Internet bubble period of the late 1990s. Normal markets, not characterized by irrational enthusiasm, display the use of both corporate securities and cash in funding takeovers with cash deals (good money) enjoying a premium in the form of more favorable stock market reaction. The analysis provides useful insights for both monetary economists and researchers in corporate finance. For the former, it brings a fresh currency to the interpretation and extension of Gresham’s law relating the classic debate to contemporary, as opposed to historical, events. For the latter, the lesson is that principles of monetary economics can enhance understanding of corporate financing choices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.013
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of financial perspectives→Same topicEconomic theories and models→French-language works237,207→