Abstract
By the start of the twentieth century, the two organizational forms most used by Dutch banks to raise capital through the dispersal of their ownership were the cooperative association and the public company. Share ownership in cooperatives was typically restricted to customers, while companies permitted outside investors. Neither organizational form dictated specific shareholder liability arrangements. New specialist banks targeting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) combined these two organizational forms and flexible liability rules to create hybrid forms. I find those that took the public company form were more likely to suffer distress during the Dutch financial crisis of the 1920s. Liability arrangements for shareholders, by contrast, had a negligible impact on these banks’ resilience.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
History,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous),Business and International Management
Reference53 articles.
1. Interlocking directorates and conflicts of interest: the Rotterdamsche Bankvereeniging, Müller & Co. and the Dutch financial crisis of the 1920s
2. Een Middenstandscredietbank, Gesticht door de Gezamelijke Organisaties;Dengerink;Het Middenstandscredietwezen,1926
3. Opkomst en ondergang van de Hanzebank te ’s-Hertogenbosch, 1908–1923;Dekkers;Noordbrabants Historisch Jaarboek,1992
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献