Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T16:18:20.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sorting Equilibria in Financial Markets: The Incentive Problem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Extract

In a recent paper [3] we developed a theory of financial intermediariesas information producers. We argued that financial intermediaries are one class of market participants who specialize in the production of information and sell that informationtofirms with investments to finance which can profit from its distribution. In order to focus on financial intermediation, we sacrificed considerable generality in our model ofcompetitive information production in capital markets. In particular we assumed that there were only two types of assets available in the market known as type A and type B firms. Second, we assumed that information would be produced about all assets by only one information producer or that information was a declining cost industry. The approach we utilized is actually a special case of what has been called a screening or certification process (see Stiglitz [6] and Viscusi [7]), and what we prefer to callsorting. The sorting market is a market where high value and low value assets are distinguished by market participants who specialize in sorting. It is similar, but not identical, to the process of signaling developed by Spence [5] and applied to financial markets by Ross [4] and Bhattacharya [1]. Yet, the extant literature on sorting has, by and large, ignored the opportunity for thosewho stand to lose from sorting to offer side payments to thwart the sorting process. While the problem of side payments may be of minor significance for some applications of sorting and signaling models, the prospect of side payments appears to be an important if not crucial issue infinancial markets.

Type
Information and Asset Values
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Bhattacharya, S. “Imperfect Information, Dividend Policy and ‘The Bird in the Hand Fallacy.’” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 10 (Spring 1979), pp. 259270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Bhattacharya, S. “An Exploration of a Non-Dissipative Dividend—Signaling Structures.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 99 (04 1980).Google Scholar
[3]Campbell, T., and Kracaw, W.. “Information Production, Incentive Signaling and the Theory of Financial Intermediation.” Journal of Finance, Vol. 35 (09 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Ross, S.The Determination of Financial Structure: The Incentive Signaling Approach.” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 8 (Spring 1977), pp. 373390.Google Scholar
[5]Spence, M.Competitive and Optimal Responses to Signals: An Analysis of Efficiency and Distribution.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 7 (1974), pp. 296332.Google Scholar
[6]Stiglitz, J. “The Theory of ‘Screening,’ Education, and the Distribution of Income.” American Economic Review (06 1975).Google Scholar
[7]Viscusi, K.A Note on ‘Lemons’ Markets with Quality Certification.” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 9 (Spring 1978), pp. 277280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar