In my previous post, we briefly discussed the separation of ownership from control in the sense that the controllers (managers) of a company are not its owners. However, what if a nation sells off it public and private assets to overseas companies? This has been happening at an alarming rate in the UK according to Will Hutton in this Guardian op-ed. One of the problems for Hutton is that British companies cannot compete with their global rivals because "the enemy of enterprise is the unowned, purposeless British company in thrall to myriad uncommitted, myopic shareholders". According to Hutton, Tata and BMW are successful "because they are family-controlled with long-term, committed owners who have a clear vision and purpose".
Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, James Kwak and Todd Mitton have written a paper on whether firms connected to Timothy Geithner benefited from these connections. They do so by looking at how stocks of these firms reacted to the announcement that he was a nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008. They find that there were large abnormal returns for connected firms. Below is the paper's abstract and the full paper is available here . The announcement of Timothy Geithner as nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008 produced a cumulative abnormal return for financial firms with which he had a connection. This return was about 6% after the first full day of trading and about 12% after ten trading days. There were subsequently abnormal negative returns for connected firms when news broke that Geithner's confirmation might be derailed by tax issues. Excess returns for connected firms may reflect the perceived impact of relying on the advice of a small ne...