Search Results

The supply of securities is examined both in terms of the contractual characteristics and importance of each main type and the way in which the actual performance and supply of each over time is influenced by the behavior of issuers. The analysis presented is with respect to the USA. The securities explored include government securities – municipal bonds and bonds of foreign governments and international organizations; corporate securities – equities and senior debt, takeovers, bonds, junk bonds, convertible securities; mutual fund shares; mortgages and mortgage‐backed securities. The chapter also includes discussion of the implications for the supply of securities of corporate financial policy, partnership units and business taxation, and claims on financial institutions.

The first section of this chapter outlines the growing threats to the London Stock Exchange through the 1970s, including the ability of its members to block new proposals by the Council of the Stock Exchange, the investigation by the Monopolies Commission into the various restrictive practices of the Stock Exchange, relations with and attitude of the government, the formation of the Council of the Securities Industry (CSI), which was to take over responsibility for the Stock Exchange and other components of the securities market. The second section of the chapter discusses the limited responses of the Stock Exchange to these threats. The next two sections discuss technology and competition (from computerized trading systems), and change among the members (mergers, which resulted in a disproportionately large number of large firms as members, and a loss in numbers of jobbers). The last section looks at market opportunities––domestic corporate securities, government debt securities, loss of the foreign securities, traded options, the collapse of the securities market in 1974, and the by‐now limited role of the money market.

In recent decades the institutional foundations of organizational control in Germany have proven to be more enduring than those in the USA, but, nevertheless various pressures have built up on the German system of corporate governance that raise questions about its sustainability in its current form. Some of these pressures emanate from sources external to the operation of the domestic corporate economy, such as the processes of European integration and German reunification, but the more powerful pressures reflect financial and productive challenges that are integrally related to the evolving political economy of the German corporate sector. First, pressures for financial liquidity have increased; as Germans have grown wealthier, they have been moving their savings out of bank deposits and into more market‐based instruments, a trend that is likely to lead to increased demands for higher returns on corporate securities; these pressures are discussed in Sect. 8.2. The second formidable challenge to the German system of organizational control, that posed by international competition, especially from Japan, is discussed in Sect. 8.3; the Japanese competitive challenge is fundamentally an organizational one since it confronts the social foundations on which German enterprises have successfully competed in the past even in high‐quality niches in which they have previously been unrivalled. Together, and in combination with forces external to the German economy, these structural changes in the German economy (the one financial, the other productive) may challenge the foundations of the post‐war system of corporate governance; Sect. 8.4 documents some of the political responses to these challenges from key interest groups and, in particular, labour and financial interests in the German economy; Sect. 8.5 concludes by drawing out some of the possible implications of these responses for the future of German corporate governance.

This chapter assesses another new kind of policing and security agent — public corporate security personnel — with attention to the frontiers of security knowledge and credentialism. It considers the establishment of corporate security units in municipal and federal levels of government in Canada. Corporate security, operating in the private sphere, is now entering new and unexpected frontiers to become elements of policing and security networks. The chapter then focuses on how knowledge and technology from the American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS International) is transferred into Canadian levels of government and their newer corporate security units and operations as well as into the UK and Australia through some of its 240 chapters worldwide.

Law and regulation of public offering of corporate securities in India is characterized by its enormity and relative flux, and there is a danger of being overwhelmed by it. Therefore, the first chapter examines the terms and concepts that are the cardinal feature of this area of law, and add coherence to it. It begins by examining the company as a business organization and its need for capital, since companies are the most common form of business entities today and dominate the field of public offerings. Then the concept and form of securities is examined in detail, as securities are the subject matter of public offerings. The chapter then examines the method of raising capital by issue of securities, the securities market, and securities law.

This chapter presents an insider's view of how information about corporate information security breaches reaches the public. It says that “[d]espite the passage of state-level data security breach notification legislation in many states, journalists still often have to rely on sources other than the companies and organizations that experience a breach for information about a breach—either because the breach is not considered newsworthy or because the data that are stolen do not fall into the category of data covered by notification laws.” Journalists learn about breaches from a number of sources. Rarely, though, are companies or organizations that experienced the breach the first to reveal it. The chapter describes some of the practical limitations of data breach notification laws with regard to public disclosure of corporate security breaches. It argues that companies fear that disclosing such information would place them at a disadvantage with competitors and make them vulnerable to lawsuits from customers as well as to other potential intruders.