Advances in information economics, agency theory, and corporate finance have redefined the understanding of financial intermediaries.
The pre-1970s view focused on commercial banks as conduits of monetary policy, particularly due to their role in money supply via checking accounts.
The question of why financial intermediaries exist was largely overlooked, centering more on liquidity supply.
In a theoretical competitive, frictionless market:
Individual borrowers and lenders can easily contract without financial intermediaries.
Financial intermediaries (FIs) are unnecessary if there are no information or transaction costs.
The existence of financial intermediaries arises from market frictions that make contracting costly (e.g., information asymmetry).
Addresses why banks exist through a unique model.
Banks can attract demand deposits without paying interest, acting as payment system administrators.
Assumes banks as monopolistic price setters with market power in the loan market (relationship pricing).
Concludes that interest rate regulations (Reg Q) are unnecessary, as loan decisions align with government securities' average returns.
Fisher Separation Theorem applies under assumptions of independence between loan and borrowing rates, affecting term structure and interest rate risk.
Discusses the influence of information and transaction costs on bank services.
Highlights that banks lower transaction costs for depositors and borrowers through ongoing relationships providing valuable information.
Emphasizes the importance of market contracting costs in influencing bank strategies.
Argues that financial intermediaries reduce contracting costs by streamlining information access and enforcement of contracts.
Outlines that consumer demand for intermediation stems from minimizing transaction costs in financial decisions over time.
Reconsiders the uniqueness of banks, concluding that regulation is the primary reason banks differ from other intermediaries.
Examines banking’s role in money creation and the influence of reserve requirements on deposit limits.
Surveys microeconomic models influencing banking decisions on assets and capital structure.
Addresses portfolio choice as affected by market nature and contracting costs.
Highlights models with market power assumptions guiding loan supply.
Klein (1973): Banks provide divisibility of securities services.
Benston & Smith (1976): Banks mitigate transaction costs.
Kane & Buser (1979): Banks form cheaper portfolios.
Leland & Pyle (1977): Information asymmetries drive banks’ existence.
Campbell & Kracaw (1980): Banks emerge as information producers.
Financial intermediaries mitigate contracting costs linked to information asymmetries.
Examines moral hazard due to the uncertainty of monitoring borrowers post-loan.
Demonstrates that diversification in loans resolves moral-hazard issues, underscoring economies of scale in information production.
Analyzes how firm reputation and monitoring costs affect financial contracting choices.
Highlights costs associated with agency relationships and inflexible covenants affecting choices in contracts.
Reviews theories explaining financial intermediaries’ existence relative to appropriability and moral hazard problems in information production.
Proposes that successful signals in the market rely on information stakeholders having significant stakes.
Investigates how reputation influences borrower-lender interactions and subsequent investment risk choices.
Concludes that financial intermediaries enhance social value through borrower monitoring and moral hazard mitigation.
Investigates signaling implications of debt maturity choices under asymmetrical information.
Suggests that good firms may choose to bear costs to signal their quality effectively.
Proposes a model explaining behaviors in deposit rate environments focusing on core deposits and their value.
Compares informed banks that monitor firms' projects with arm's-length lenders lacking such oversight.
Discusses the trade-off between flexibility in lending versus the risk of firm project failure.
Examines how relational banking enhances lenders' informational advantage affecting pricing strategies and borrower terms.
Suggests ongoing relationships entrench informational advantages, allowing nuanced loan offers.