Abstract
Abstract: This article compares the investment and financing decisions of a firm that adopts a ‘first‐best’ strategy with those of a firm that adopts a ‘second‐best’ strategy. The former issues bonds upon deciding an initial capacity, while the latter issues bonds, and only then decides an initial capacity. The former is thus able to avoid the agency cost associated with the ‘debt overhang’ problem. Accordingly, the former will both issue more bonds and install a larger initial capacity than the latter. However, the agency cost of debt, i.e., firm value difference between these two strategies, is modest for plausible parameter values.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
