Do Bond Holders Lose From Junk Bond Covenant Changes?

Marcel Kahan and Bruce Tuckman

University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management from Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA

Abstract: This paper documents that firms can and do change the convenants of their public debt indentures through consent solicitations. A game theoretic model of these solicitations shows that they can coercive, i.e. bondholders who cannot coordinate their actions may consent to convenant changes even when it is not in their collective interest to do so. Despite this theoretical finding, abnomral bondholder returns around the announcements of consent solicitations are significantly positive. Further analysis of the data indicates that bondholders can, in fact, coordinate their actions to modify or defeat disadvantageous proposals. As a result, bondholders obtain a portion of the gains resulting from convenant modifications. The public policy implication of these findings is that bondholders do not need additional regulatory or judicial protection in the solicitation process.

Date: 1992-12-01
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4933c667.pdf;origin=repeccitec (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cdl:anderf:qt4933c667

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management from Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Lisa Schiff ().