Corporations-Miller-Sp06

Corporations-Miller-Sp06 - Corporations: Spring 2006 I....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Corporations: Spring 2006 I. Intro: What is a Firm A. Firms vs. contracts as ways of organizing businesses B. Coase’s Theorem assumes no transaction costs but w/out them the assignment of legal rts w/n affect socially efficient outcome. Will just bargain for optimal distribution and most efficient K. So gives us a lens to look at real world and ask impt question: what about transaction costs? C. Why do business ppl sometimes choose contract and not a firm? a. Coase: purchase of a firm or contract will occur when easier and cheaper to do so b. Advantages of a Firm i. Both parties will get info when buy firm so low transaction costs and can minimize other costs. ii. Legal advantages: lower taxes or limited liability iii. Minimizes opportunism c. Distinction b/w firms and K is probably overstated b/c contracts can be structured to look like firms and firms can be understood as complex networks of contracts i. Relational contracts: contract b/w 2 parties w/ intent to have LT business relationship and many terms of K are left undefined or subject to negotiation. Similar to firms b/c closer connection b/w 2 parties ii. Firms: can be viewed as a bureaucracy or a creature of contracts. These contracts are unusual in 2 ways: 1. (1) very vague/open ended K: Ex: Corp officers have a fiduciary duty which is an implied K 2. (2) interconnected: company’s K w/ CEO is related w/ its K w/ its bd of directors; firm as a network of contracts D. Structure of a Firm a. Firm operates in complex social/legal environment b. Has customers, suppliers, employees, managers, shareholders, creditors (supply capital), and gov’t . But corp law is limited in its application to these factors. c. Corp law primarily deals w / managers, shareholders, and the gov’t. Gov’t and cts as supervisors of this relationship. E. 3 Perspectives on the Firm (mostly small ones but talk usually about big firms) a. (1) Berle-Means : late 1930s and very vibrant today: i. Separation of ownership and control : Owned by shareholders and run by professional managers who d/n own company. ii. Effect: principle problem of corp law. Led to abuse: managers were managing other ppl’s $ for their own benefit (Ken Lay, Kozlowksi) iii. Solutions: increase regulation b. (2) Law and Economics: recognizes that Berle-Means was right but differs b/c: i. Self-interested behavior by managers is referred to as “agency costs ” which has diff normative connotations: not as condemned ii. Solution: control by mkt mechanisms . If manager steals, then w/n run a good company and mkt will sanction the manager and the company. iii. Going to be residual agency costs . C/n squeeze all costs out of the system b/c all employees shirk or are lazy at some point. Want to squeeze agency costs to point where cost of squeezing the costs=the cost squeezed iv. Gov’t plays a more limited role . Agency costs of management are controlled by principles like fiduciary duties enforced by cts....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/04/2008 for the course LAW ALL taught by Professor Multiple during the Fall '06 term at NYU.

Page1 / 56

Corporations-Miller-Sp06 - Corporations: Spring 2006 I....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online