SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Malcolm Rutherford)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:19:15 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
In terms of old institutionslist work on stock market and asset prices, a great deal
followed on from Veblen's discussion of stock valuations being based on profit
expectations and on intangible assets rather than any physical or cost based valuation.  A
lot of this discussion was centered on issues of regulation of railways and utility
companies, and the criticism of the Court's tendency to try to base regulated prices on
the a "fair return on capital."  As people such as Robert Hale and James Bonbright never
tired of repeating, the argument was circular, as the rate set must affect the valuation
of the company.
 
Se Robert L. Hale, "The Physical Value Fallacy in Rate Cases" Yale Law Journal 30,  1921;
and "Rate Making and the Revision of the Property Concept" Columbia Law Review, 22, 1932.
James Bonbright, The Valuation of Property, 1937 
James Bonbright and Gardiner Means, The Holding Company 1932 
 
also relevant to the extension of Veblenian ideas on the corporation and stock markets
are: Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property 1932 William Ripley,
Main Street and Wall Street, 1927
 
 
Malcolm Rutherford 
University of Victoria 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2