05988oam 22013574 450 991080963220332120200520144314.01-58906-174-81-4755-1540-5(CKB)2550000001041554(EBL)1607102(SSID)ssj0000943581(PQKBManifestationID)11985109(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000943581(PQKBWorkID)10977222(PQKB)10937266(MiAaPQ)EBC1607102(Au-PeEL)EBL1607102(CaPaEBR)ebr10661245(OCoLC)821931528(IMF)WPIEE2012292(IMF)WPIEA2012292(EXLCZ)99255000000104155420020129d2012 uf 0engur|n|---|||||txtccrSpring Forward or Fall Back? The Post-Crisis Recovery of Firms /Leandro Medina1st ed.Washington, D.C. :International Monetary Fund,2012.1 online resource (32 p.)IMF Working PapersDescription based upon print version of record.1-61635-498-4 1-4755-2473-0 Includes bibliographical references.Cover; Contents; I. Introduction; II. Empirical Strategy; A. Explanatory Variables; III. Data Description; IV. Descriptive Statistics; V. Empirical Findings; A. Nonlinear Effects of Leverage; B. Robustness Tests: Trade Sensitivity and Real Depreciation Effects; VI. Conclusion; References; Tables; 1. Country and Region Coverage; 2. Sample Coverage; 3. Summary Statistics; 4. Baseline Regression: All Countries; 5. Baseline Regression: Emerging Economies; 6. Baseline Regression: Advanced Economies; 7. Nonlinear Effects of Leverage; 8. Depreciation and Trade Effects; Figures1. Density Distribution of Corporate Performance: 2007, 2009, and 20102. Density Distribution of Corporate Performance by Levels of Leverage: 2010; 3. Corporate Performance: 2007-2010; Appendix: Data Sources and Definitions of VariablesThis paper studies corporate performance in the aftermath of the global crisis by examining 6,581 manufacturing firms in 48 developed and developing countries in 2010, identifying factors of resilience as well as vulnerability. Based on a cross-sectional analysis, the results show that pre-crisis leverage and short-term debt have had negative effects on the speed of the recovery, while asset tangibility has had positive effects. The negative effect of leverage is non-linear, being particularly strong in firms with high pre-crisis leverage. Furthermore, the effects are different for advanced and emerging market economies. The paper also shows that the macroeconomic framework critically matters for firm growth. In particular, in countries that have allowed the exchange rate to depreciate, firms have had a faster recovery in sectors highly dependent on trade.IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ;No. 2012/292Global Financial Crisis, 2008-2009Financial crisesCapacityimfCapital and Ownership StructureimfCapitalimfCorporate Finance and Governance: GeneralimfCurrencyimfDepreciationimfEconomic & financial crises & disastersimfEconomic sectorsimfExchange rate arrangementsimfExchange ratesimfFinancial CrisesimfFinancial crisesimfFinancial Risk and Risk ManagementimfFinancial Risk ManagementimfFinancing PolicyimfFirm Behavior: Empirical AnalysisimfForeign ExchangeimfForeign exchangeimfGoodwillimfIndustries: ManufacturingimfIndustry Studies: Manufacturing: GeneralimfIntangible CapitalimfInternational Finance: GeneralimfInvestmentimfInvestments: GeneralimfMacroeconomicsimfManufacturing industriesimfManufacturingimfNational accountsimfSaving and investmentimfValue of FirmsimfUnited StatesimfGlobal Financial Crisis, 2008-2009.Financial crises.CapacityCapital and Ownership StructureCapitalCorporate Finance and Governance: GeneralCurrencyDepreciationEconomic & financial crises & disastersEconomic sectorsExchange rate arrangementsExchange ratesFinancial CrisesFinancial crisesFinancial Risk and Risk ManagementFinancial Risk ManagementFinancing PolicyFirm Behavior: Empirical AnalysisForeign ExchangeForeign exchangeGoodwillIndustries: ManufacturingIndustry Studies: Manufacturing: GeneralIntangible CapitalInternational Finance: GeneralInvestmentInvestments: GeneralMacroeconomicsManufacturing industriesManufacturingNational accountsSaving and investmentValue of Firms332.1;332.1/53Medina Leandro1660045DcWaIMFBOOK9910809632203321Spring Forward or Fall Back? The Post-Crisis Recovery of Firms4263315UNINA