2009
DOI: 10.26509/frbc-wp-200901
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Monetary Approach to Asset Liquidity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2 When assets are opaque, private information can arise when owners of assets have an advantage or a higher incentive to acquire information about the quality of assets relative to potential buyers (see Dang, Gorton and Holmstrom, 2009). 3 Another related literature uses random matching models with private information to study monetary exchange (for example Williamson and Wright, 1994;Lester, Postlewaite and Wright, 2008;Rocheteau, 2009; Our paper shows that shocks to asset quality lead to a market freeze due to a lemons problem a la Akerlof (1970) when traders have to search for a counterparty. Trading, however, can be restored, if the government reduces the adverse selection problem (Mankiw, 1986).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 When assets are opaque, private information can arise when owners of assets have an advantage or a higher incentive to acquire information about the quality of assets relative to potential buyers (see Dang, Gorton and Holmstrom, 2009). 3 Another related literature uses random matching models with private information to study monetary exchange (for example Williamson and Wright, 1994;Lester, Postlewaite and Wright, 2008;Rocheteau, 2009; Our paper shows that shocks to asset quality lead to a market freeze due to a lemons problem a la Akerlof (1970) when traders have to search for a counterparty. Trading, however, can be restored, if the government reduces the adverse selection problem (Mankiw, 1986).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this version of the model, if households have too much bargaining power then it is optimal keep liquidity scarce. More work could be done on these 1 3 For related results showing how optimal policy can depend on the mechanism, see Rocheteau andWright (2005,2009). …”
Section: Public Liquidity Provisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, it is straightforward to allow credit in some meetings, but not others, and all results go through exactly as stated provided we reinterpret as the probability of a nocredit meeting. Similarly, we can assume shares in …rms are recognizable in some meetings, but not others, or make counterfeiting costly and use the endogenous upper bound s > 0 derived in Rocheteau (2008) or Li and Rocheteau (2009) (recall that s = 0 when counterfeiting is costless). Given this is understood, we proceed here with d t = s = 0 in all DM meetings.…”
Section: Imperfect Creditmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, because we want to have both money and equity used in transactions, even when money is dominated in rate of return, we give shares a disadvantage in terms of recognizability. Thus buyers in the DM can costlessly produce fake shares, which are illegitimate claims to dividends in the CM, perhaps because they are counterfeit-bad claims to good trees-or because they are lemonsgood claims to bad trees (see Rocheteau, 2009;and Li and Rocheteau, 2010, for more on this).…”
Section: Asset Pricing and Liquiditymentioning
confidence: 99%