# Firm value

`kaal:entity:firm-value`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 6 claims that carry the concept tag `firm-value`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

6 claims across 1 works, 2015 to 2015.

**2015**

- [2629451-007](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-007) [mechanism/argued] -- The combination of a positive market reaction at the start of the N/DPA term and a negative reaction at its end is evidence that the governance changes N/DPAs mandate actually matter to firm value.
  > We interpret the positive market reaction at the beginning of the N/DPA term and investors' negative reaction at the end of the N/DPA term as evidence that governance changes mandated by N/DPAs matter.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451
- [2629451-016](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-016) [mechanism/argued] -- Unlike legislative mandates, N/DPA governance changes are preceded by no public debate or publicity, so their effect on firm value is not gradually incorporated into prices and is therefore testable by event study.
  > congressional mandates, prior to the ANDPAE there is no public debate or other publicity pertaining to the anticipated governance changes in the NDPA or possible fines. Accordingly, the effect of NDPA governance changes on firm value is not gradual and therefore testable.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451
- [2629451-027](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-027) [mechanism/argued] -- The positive market reaction at announcement and at the start of the term is the market acknowledging that an N/DPA gives the firm an opportunity to be better managed, more compliant, and less exposed to penalties.
  > Consistent with Hypothesis 2, we interpret the positive market reaction at ANDPA and BNDPAT as the market's acknowledgement that the execution and effectiveness of an N/DPA is an opportunity for the entity to be better managed, more compliant, with fewer possibilities to incur penalties
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451
- [2629451-028](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-028) [mechanism/argued] *(failure mode)* -- The negative market reaction at the end of the N/DPA term is the market acknowledging that suboptimal governance practices are likely to resume once the term expires.
  > In turn, we interpret the negative market reaction at ENDPAT in Figures 4 and 4a as the market's acknowledgment that post N/DPA term expiration suboptimal governance practices are likely to continue
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451
- [2629451-030](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-030) [mechanism/argued] -- The paired positive reaction at the start and negative reaction at the end of the N/DPA term is direct evidence that N/DPA mandated governance changes matter to investors.
  > We interpret the positive market reaction at BNDPAT and its negative reaction at ENDPAT as evidence that governance changes mandated by N/DPAs matter.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451
- [2629451-031](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-031) [mechanism/argued] -- The market values N/DPA governance changes during the term because those changes effectively address the underlying corporate wrongdoing and its damage to goodwill and reputation while reducing the likelihood of continuing fines and litigation.
  > The market assesses the governance changes during the term of the N/DPA as beneficial for market value because it effectively addresses corporate wrongdoing and the associated negative effects on goodwill and reputation while lowering the likelihood of continuing fines and litigation.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/firm-value.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.