Optimal project rejection and new firm start-ups

Entrants are typically found to be more innovative than incumbent firms. Furthermore, these innovative ideas often originate with established firms in the industry. Therefore, the established firm and the start-up firm seem to select different types of projects. We claim that this is the consequence of their optimal project allocation mechanism, which depends on their comparative advantage. The start-up firm may seem more "innovative" than the established firm because the comparative advantage of the start-up firm is to commercialize "innovative" projects, i.e. projects that do not fit with the established firms' existing assets. Our model integrates various facts found in the industrial organization literature about the entry rate, firm focus, firm growth, industry growth and innovation. We also obtain some counter-intuitive results, such as that a reduction in the cost of start-ups may actually slow down start-ups, or that the firm may voluntarily give away the property rights to the inventions discovered within the firmManagement; Innovation management;

Contracts and Money

We analyze the contractual relation between workers and their employers when there is nominal risk. The key feature of the problem is that the consumption deflator is random and observed sometime after the effort is exerted. The worker's effort is not observable, and to induce the agent to work, second-best contracts do not insure the worker fully. They do eliminate all nominal risk for the parties (by fully indexing the terms of the contracts to the price level) but they would be re-negotiated. Foreseeing this, the parties to the contract will write one that is renegotiation-proof. Under such a contract, nominal shocks affect real consumption. Since the argument should apply in many situations, it will have macroeconomic implications, one of which is short-run non-neutrality of money. We have found that surprise money is likely to redistribute consumption and welfare towards workers, and away from shareholders.

Bank versus venture capital

Why do some start-up firms raise funds from banks and others from venture capitalists? To answer this question, I develop a model of start-up financing when intellectual property rights are not well protected. The upside of VC financing is that the VC understands the business better than a bank. The downside, however, is that the VC may steal the idea and use it himself. The results of the model are consistent with empirical regularities on start-up financing. The model implies that the characteristics of the firms financing from venture capitalists are low-collateral, high-growth and high-profitability. The model also suggests that the tighter protection of intellectual property rights contributes to the recent dramatic growth of the US venture capital industry.Collateral, intellectual-property, venture-capital

Why Do Fast Growing Sectors Not Experience Above-Average Entry of New Firms?

No abstract.

Expertise and finance: Mergers motivated by technological change

This paper argues that a large technological innovation may lead to a merger wave by inducing entrepreneurs to seek funds from technologically knowledgeable firms -experts. When a large technological innovation occurs, the ability of non-experts (banks) to discriminate between good and bad quality projects is reduced. Experts can continue to charge a low rate of interest for financing because their expertise enables them to identify good quality projects and to avoid unprofitable investments. On the other hand, non-experts now charge a higher rate of interest in order to screen bad projects. More entrepreneurs, therefore, disclose their projects to experts to raise funds from them. Such experts are, however, able to copy the projects and disclosure to them invites the possibility of competition. Thus the entrepreneur and the expert may merge so as to achieve product market collusion. As well as rationalizing mergers, the model can also explain various forms of venture financing by experts such as corporate investors and business angels.Expertise, venture financing, merger, technological innovation

The Interaction between Clause-Level Parameters and Context in Russian Morphosyntax

In der Reihe Slavistische Beiträge werden vor allem slavistische Dissertationen des deutschsprachigen Raums sowie vereinzelt auch amerikanische, englische und russische publiziert. Darüber hinaus stellt die Reihe ein Forum für Sammelbände und Monographien etablierter Wissenschafter/innen dar

Law & Entrepreneurship: Do Courts Matter?

In this essay, we sketch the outlines of a research agenda exploring links between courts and entrepreneurship. Our conception of law and entrepreneurship encompasses the study of positive law (including constitutions, statutes, and regulations), common law doctrines, and private ordering that relate to the discovery and exploitation of profitable opportunities by new firms. We briefly survey the economics literatures that relate to law and entrepreneurship, including the law and finance literature launched by the work of Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny (LLSV). Relying on the suggestive work of LLSV and other economists who have labored over the connections between entrepreneurship and law, we suspect that courts may play an important role in facilitating or hindering entrepreneurial activity. We are particularly interested in the possibility that courts may facilitate the evolution of legal rules to address novel issues raised by entrepreneurial firms. This adaptability hypothesis may be subject to empirical testing, thus shedding light on the otherwise perplexing divide between common law and civil law countries identified by LLSV. The motivation for such a test lies in the conjecture that common law countries update their laws more frequently than civil law countries through judicial intervention. Adaptability in this sense is said to encourage entrepreneurship because outmoded laws allow for opportunism, thus discouraging capital formation. The adaptability hypothesis implies that judges in common law systems have more room to maneuver than judges in civil law systems, and we describe the method by which we intend to approach our future study of adaptability

Law & Entrepreneurship: Do courts matter?

In this essay, we sketch the outlines of a research agenda exploring links between courts and entrepreneurship. Our conception of law and entrepreneurship encompasses the study of positive law (including constitutions, statutes, and regulations), common law doctrines, and private ordering that relate to the discovery and exploitation of profitable opportunities by new firms. We briefly survey the economics literatures that relate to law and entrepreneurship, including the law and finance literature launched by the work of Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny (LLSV). Relying on the suggestive work of LLSV and other economists who have labored over the connections between entrepreneurship and law, we suspect that courts may play an important role in facilitating or hindering entrepreneurial activity. We are particularly interested in the possibility that courts may facilitate the evolution of legal rules to address novel issues raised by entrepreneurial firms. This adaptability hypothesis may be subject to empirical testing, thus shedding light on the otherwise perplexing divide between common law and civil law countries identified by LLSV. The motivation for such a test lies in the conjecture that common law countries update their laws more frequently than civil law countries through judicial intervention. Adaptability in this sense is said to encourage entrepreneurship because outmoded laws allow for opportunism, thus discouraging capital formation. The adaptability hypothesis implies that judges in common law systems have more room to maneuver than judges in civil law systems, and we describe the method by which we intend to approach our future study of adaptability

The Interaction between Clause-Level Parameters and Context in Russian Morphosyntax

In der Reihe Slavistische Beiträge werden vor allem slavistische Dissertationen des deutschsprachigen Raums sowie vereinzelt auch amerikanische, englische und russische publiziert. Darüber hinaus stellt die Reihe ein Forum für Sammelbände und Monographien etablierter Wissenschafter/innen dar