Search results

At the time they occurred, the savings and loan insolvencies were considered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Contrary to what was then believed, and in sharp contrast with 2007–2009, they in fact had little macroeconomic significance. Savings and Loan (S&L) remediation cost between 2 percent and 3 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), whereas the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the conservatorships of Fannie and Freddie actually made money for the US Treasury. But the direct cost of government remediation is largely irrelevant in judging macro significance. What matters is the cumulative output loss associated with and plausibly caused by failing financial institutions. I estimate output losses for 1981–1984, 1991–1998, and 2007–2026 (the latter utilizing forecasts and projections along with actual data through 2015) and, for a final comparison, 1929–1941. The losses associated with 2007–2009 have been truly disastrous – in the same order of magnitude as the Great Depression. The S&L failures were, in contrast, inconsequential. Macroeconomists and policy makers should reserve the word crisis for financial disturbances that threaten substantial damage to the real economy, and continue efforts to identify in advance financial institutions which are systemically important (SIFI), and those which are not.

This study aims to ask whether the funding behaviour of companies is different during a recession. Specifically, the authors study whether firms fund marketing resources and capabilities with internal or external financing during a recession and under which conditions of strategic financial flexibility debt might be used to fund marketing resources and capabilities in recessions.

This study estimates empirical models using a newly merged data set covering 17 years, from 2000 to 2016. The authors merge firms’ marketing and financial information from Advertising Age, the American Customer Satisfaction Index, Compustat and the Centre for Research in Security Prices. The sample includes a panel of 653 firm-years of 67 top corporate advertisers.

The results indicate that firms take recessions as opportunities to be proactive and invest in short- and long-term marketing capabilities, companies with higher strategic financial flexibility relative to their industry peers tend to rely more on debt to fund short- and long-term marketing capabilities during recessions, firms use internal financing to fund their marketing budgets and short-term marketing capabilities in recessionary and non-recessionary periods and firms use internal financing and signals from past stock returns as mechanisms to fund long-term marketing capabilities.

The findings contribute to the body of knowledge on the antecedents of marketing resources and capabilities. The results extend the pecking order theory to include recessions and provide nuances of the financing drivers of resources and capabilities.

Companies should be proactive during recessions and invest in short- and long-term marketing capabilities. When negotiating marketing budgets with chief financial officers, marketing practitioners could suggest the sources to finance specific marketing resources and capabilities. Based on the results of top corporate advertisers, the authors recommend companies to fund marketing capabilities with internal resources (e.g. cash flows, retained earnings), and if cash is not available, companies need to rely on their superior strategic financial flexibility to access long-term debt and fund investments in marketing capabilities. The authors also recommend companies to fund long-term marketing capabilities by re-allocating investments. As well, signals from past performance are an important source to gain access to capital and fund investments in long-term marketing capabilities.

This study provides a more complete picture of the financial antecedents of marketing resources and capabilities in general and during a recession. The authors provide light on the moderating role of strategic financial flexibility during recessions. This study also clarifies the potential signalling of past performance for funding marketing resources and capabilities.

This paper empirically investigates the structural evolution of the US financial systems. It particularly aims to explore if the structure of the financial systems changes when the economy enters a recession.

The empirical analysis is conducted through the statistical approach of principal components analysis (PCA) and the graph theoretic approach of minimum spanning trees (MSTs).

The PCA results suggest that the VIX was the dominant factor influencing the financial system prior to the recession; however, the monetary policy represented by the three‐month T‐bill yield became the leading factor in the system during the recession. By analyzing the MSTs, we find evidence that the structure of the financial system during the economic recession is substantially different from that during the period of economic expansion. Moreover, we discover that the financial markets are more integrated during the economic recession. The much stronger integration of the financial system was found to start right before the advent of the recession.

Research findings will help individuals, institutions, regulators, central bankers better understand the market structure under the economic turmoil, so more efficient strategies can be used to minimize the systemic risk.

This study compares the structure of the US financial markets in economic expansion and contraction periods. The structural dynamics of the financial system are explored, focusing on the recent economic recession triggered by the US subprime mortgage crisis. We introduce a new systemic risk measure.

With Spanish Community Innovation Survey data, this paper tests two main hypotheses as explanation of the fall in business innovation output in the Great Recession: the aggregate demand effect (firms have lower propensity to initiate innovation projects in recession than in contraction from demand-pull and profit expectations effects) and the risk effect (a greater proportion of the initiated projects fail in recessions than in expansions).

The research methodology consists on first modelling the decision by firms to initiate innovation projects in t or not (probit model), and, second, modelling the outcomes, success or failure in t + 1 of firms that decide to initiate (Heckman model).

The empirical results support the two hypotheses. They also indicate that the sensitivity of the decision to initiate innovation projects to the aggregate demand is more pronounced among financially constrained firms than among unconstrained ones, while the risk effect appears to be independent of the financial situation of firms.

The results of the research are limited by not being able to follow up individual innovation projects, and by not having available a more representative sample of firms where non-innovators and potential innovators are represented (now is biased toward potential innovators).

The results highlight the importance of macroeconomic stability for sustained business innovation output over time and calls managers’ attention in better management of innovation risk.

The results of the paper recommend macroeconomic polies aimed at the stabilization of aggregate demand and smoothing the business cycle, as a way to contribute to the stabilization of the growth of innovation output over time. Monetary and fiscal policies that smooth the business cycle will then have significant effects in the stabilization of innovation output and, in turn, in the reduction of volatility of economic growth over time. Increasing the direct public financial aid to undertake innovation projects in recession periods will not have the same innovation output stabilization effect than the stabilization of the aggregate demand. The reason is that, as the paper points out, the innovation output of financially unconstrained firms is also affected negatively by the contraction of aggregate demand in recession periods.

This paper is the first one to investigate the differences in business innovation outputs in expansions and recessions, separating the aggregate demand and the risk effect that the organisation for economic co-operation and development identifies as main determinants of the fall in innovation output during the Great Recession. The decomposition of firms’ innovation output in the decision to initiate innovation projects and the likelihood that those initiated succeed is also new in the literature.

This paper aims to examine the month and the trading month effects under changing financial trends. The Greek stock market was chosen to implement the authors' assumptions because during the period 2002-2012, there were clear and long-term periods of financial growth and recession. Thus, the authors examine whether the financial trends influence not only the Greek stock market’s returns, but also its anomalies.

Daily financial data from the Athens Exchange General Index for the period 2002-2012 are used. The sample is separated into two sub-periods: the financial growth sub-period (2002-2007), and the financial recession sub-period (2008-2012). Several linear and non-linear models were applied to find which is the most appropriate, and the results suggested that the T-GARCH model better fits the sample.

The empirical results show that changing economic and financial conditions influence the calendar effects. The trading month effect, especially, completely changes in each fortnight following the financial trend. Regarding the January effect, which is the most popular month effect, the results confirm its existence during the growth period, but during the recession period, we find that it fades. Therefore, by examining the aforementioned calendar effects in different periods, different conclusions may be reached, perhaps because the financial trends’ influence is ignored.

The empirical results confirm the authors' assumption that a possible explanation for the controversial empirical findings regarding the calendar anomalies may be the different financial trends. However, these are some primary results that are confirmed only for the Greek case. Further empirical research for deeper stock markets and/or a group of countries may be useful to reach conclusions regarding the financial trends’ influence on the calendar anomalies patterns.

The findings are helpful to anyone who invests and deals with the Greek stock market. Moreover, they may pave the way for an alternative calendar anomalies research approach, proving useful for investors who take these anomalies into account when they plan their investment strategy.

This paper contributes to the literature by presenting an alternative methodological approach regarding the calendar anomalies study and a new explanation for the calendar effects existence/fade through time by examining the calendar anomalies patterns under a changing economic environment and financial trends.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on how investments in research and development (R&D) and advertising affect the performance of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) during recessions.

Contingency theory is applied to a data set of 376 Italian clothing SMEs during the period 2000-2010 to test whether investment in R&D and advertising impacts financial performance differently when contingent factors (such as market share, financial leverage and business model change) are taken into account.

Empirical results confirm that market share and leverage moderate the effects of investments in R&D and advertising (i.e. intangibles) on performance, and also that changes in business models are an important contingent factor that explains performance. Specifically, the paper ascertains that a novelty-centered business model, together with investments in intangibles, positively affects performance during recessions.

This study offers an input to the debate on how SMEs develop and sustain their competitive advantage during the recession. It contributes to existent theory by showing whether and how contingencies, such as a firm's market share and leverage, moderate the relationship between performance and investments in R&D and advertising in SMEs. Second, it addresses the call for additional data “about the strategic effects of business models and how they influence the positioning of firms in their competitive environment” (Amit and Zott, 2008, p. 20) by introducing business model change/innovation as a new contingency factor and by empirically testing its effects on “objective measures of firm performance” (Bock et al., 2012, p. 301).

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relative performance of Shariah-compliant companies (SCCs) compared to conventional companies. This study focuses on two periods, the first being the recession period of 2007-2010 and the second, the non-recession period of 2011-2014.

A quantitative approach is adopted using an ordinary least square regression model. The chosen variables are those used by previous researchers in conventional studies of corporate performance. Data are selected from individual companies listed on the FTSE All World Index. This study examines two periods of time: the recession of 2007-2010 and the post-recession years of 2011-2014 to analyse performance measured by accounting returns (return on equity, return on asset and earnings per share) and market returns (stock return and price/earnings ratio).

The study found that SCCs outperformed non-Shariah compliant companies, in terms of both accounting and market returns during both periods. It was also found that size has a negative effect on performance during both periods. The degree of risk, leverage and growth has no significance in either period, but cash flow from operations has a positive effect on performance in both.

The study could beneficially be extended by the inclusion of corporate governance variables to assess how these affect performance in SCCs.

In contrast to previous research carried out on indices, this study uses data from individual companies listed on the FTSE All World Index. It provides insight into the way Shariah ethics can influence performance and suggests that some of the features could be useful if adopted by conventional companies.

Country crises can provoke damages to a country's economic activity and citizens in a way that will always demand a deeper understanding of their determinants. Political issues are commonly mentioned as an important factor boosting these crises. This paper investigates the political factors behind financial crises and recessions.

Using variables from the ICRG rating system, logistic panel regressions are run to determine whether or not the political risk variables explain country crises.

Results disclose the importance of socioeconomic conditions to financial crises and recessions with no influence from the political arena. Against expectations, political instability does not help to explain crises. Political risk ratings also show their importance, demonstrating that the higher is the risk, the higher is the probability of debt and currency crises occurrence.

The findings in this paper contribute to a growing literature of political risk and crises, enhancing the value of political risk assessment and increasing the application of its consequences.

This study aimed to know the effect of cross-sectional risk, which comprises business-specific risk and stock market volatility, as a variable for estimating macroeconomic risk in Indonesia. This study observes public companies in Indonesia and Indonesian macroeconomic data from 2004 to 2020. In this study, the author uses term spread as the dependent variable that reflects macroeconomic risk. The cross-sectional risk comprises financial friction (FF), cash flow (CF), debt–service ratio, and stock market volatility as independent variables. By using the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) Model method, this study shows that business-specific and stock market risk can estimate macroeconomic risk, so that it becomes an early signal of economic shock, such as recession or high inflation, in the future. The model in this study also examines the cross-sectional risk relationship with other macroeconomic indicators, such as the Consumer Confidence Index (CCI), money supply (M0), and Indonesia’s trade balance (TB).