Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The original '''Status:''' Old paper ([[needs repurposing, perhaps into multiple papers. '''Co-authors:''' Jim Brander Egan (2007) - The Role of VCs in Acquisitions]]) had a full data rebuild, detailed on '''To do:''' Lit reviews '''Project Quality:''' All reasonably high '''Project Page: ''' [[VC Acquisitions Paper]].
The obvious possibilities for this paper are to:*Focus more on the IA.*Do (1) could be a JFQA Comment, describing how we get a supply-side VC analysis different result from Masulis and Nahata (i2011).e., include reputations, the possibility of grandstanding, etcThis requires that we reconsile Masulis and Nahata's results (and perhaps Gompers and Xuan's too).)
The immediate 'to do' (2) is:*Read probably the Masulis simplest paper to write. We will use continuous measures of IA, and Nahata perhaps compute new distance measures. (3) is best answered using a dataset on acquisition of public firms by public firms (2011i.e. really Mergers) paper carefully. Also need Dierkins' other measures... All three papers need lit reviews doing first.
no edit summary
This is a private page for those with 'Trusted' access that summarizes my thoughts on current intended projects.
=To Do List=
Each project has its own 'to do', but in order to explore new projects or break existing (inc. planned) projects into better questions there are the following tasks to be done:
*Determine whether there are existing models for the effects of the '''winner's curse under asymmetric information'''
*Determine the extent of the literature on the ''''choice' between IPO and acquisition''' for startup firms seeking commercialization financing
*Put together a list of models on complements and substitute technologies
=Technology and Commercialization Strategy=
'''Status:''' Builds of my thesis... Basic empirics done, experimental model done.
'''Co-authors:'''
'''To do:''' New empirics, finish model
'''Project Quality:''' Potentially very high
'''Project Page:''' [[Technology Financing Paper]]
This project currently has priority over all others.
=Acquisitions Paper=
The resulting original paper was submitted (dual submission) to the 3rd Annual Entrepreneurial Finance and Innovation Conference [[Brander Egan (EFIC2007) conference and the Review - The Role of Corporate Finance Studies (RCFSVCs in Acquisitions]]). It was rejected from bothhad a full data rebuild, detailed on the [[VC Acquisitions Paper]] page.
We now have a number of possible papers that we could write:#The key points from effects of VC on the reviewers were:*We should explain how we get a different result from Masulis and Nahata (2011), who find a +3% return premium returns to VC-backed acquisitions*We should use our continous measures #The role of Information Asymmetries (IA (i.e., look to find a monotonic effect). And consider within-industry in acquisitions to see whether this mitigates IA problems.*To back up the winner's curse we should consider the number of competing bidders.*Possibly we should consider long rum performance and attempt to explain why the acquirers buy VCprivately-backed held firms.*Focus less on the univariate results.#Measuring IA
=Patent Pools Licensing Rate Paper=
'''Q. Are licensing rates lower for patents included in pools?'''
'''Status:''' Infancy
'''Co-authors:''' David Teece, Ed Sherry
'''To do:''' Conference call on how to proceed
'''Project Quality:''' Depends on data and empirical execution
'''Project Page:''' [[Patent Pool Licensing Project]]
=Mexican-Standoff Paper=
'''Q. What are the equilibria in patent litigation between competitors?'''
'''Status:''' Conception
'''Co-authors:''' David Teece
'''To do:''' Lit Review
'''Project Quality:''' Potential Job Market Paper
'''Project Page:''' None yet
==Background==
Nokia sues Apple, Apple sues Sumsung, Samsung sues Nokia, and so on. There's been an endless round of [[Patent Litigation]] between the mobile phone and tablet device manufactures of late. Could this be related to the nature of competition in the markets? Pharma firms apparently sue at every infringement, whereas large semiconductor incumbents apparently never sue each off (are they in a Mexican standoff?). Infringement is obvious for pharma firms and potentially non-obvious for semiconductor firms. NPEs always sue, but they have no production rents to worry about. Some device manufacturers try to shut each other out of the market with ITC injunctions, and sue weak firms...
==Description==
The project would try to describe at least some of the behaviour above using game theory (probably an infinitely repeated, full information game) and then use litigation data to show that the game models reality well.
=The Value of Patent Citations for Startups=
'''Q. Do some patent citations increase value and others decrease it? And can we use renewals to crudely cut between the two?'''
'''Status:''' Advanced
'''Co-authors:''' poss. Bronwyn Hall
'''To do:''' Rebuild data incorporating renewals
'''Project Quality:''' Potential Job Market Paper?
'''Project Page:''' None yet
This project might also need data on priority dates and other extentions, though this might be able to be deduced from renewals data. The project either works or doesn't once the data is done.
=Technology substitution and the choice of commercialization financing=
'''Q. Do firms with more radical innovations seek initial public offerings?'''
'''Status:''' Emprics is there. Needs a model and writing.
'''Co-authors:''' poss. Jim?
'''To do:''' Work on the model, decide whether the paper is feasible.
'''Project Quality:''' Potential Job Market Paper? Has a big maintained assumption unless done with two models (and then has a measurement problem).
'''Project Page:''' None yet
The maintained assumption would be that citations represent substitution. Otherwise, would need two models (one for subs, one for comps).
There are two possibilities here:
#Build out my 'learning' model. This might also give rise to a spin-off model, particularly if I can get complements in there.
#Use an off the shelf model (e.g. ?)
