Vyacheslav Fos
Vyacheslav (Slava) Fos is Associate Professor of Finance at Boston College’s Carroll School of Management. His teaching and research interests are in the area of corporate governance, capital markets, corporate finance, and household finance. His research has been published in journals such as Econometrica, Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics, Review of Financial Studies, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, and Management Science. His research studies information transmission in financial markets, insider trading, boards of directors, the role of activist shareholders in corporate governance, the role of stock liquidity in corporate governance, and shareholder short-termism. His papers have earned several awards, including 2015 Amundi Smith Breeden Distinguished Paper Prize award by the Journal of Finance. Fos earned his PhD in finance from the Columbia University, Graduate School of Business and his MA and BA (both with distinction) in economics from the Ben-Gurion University, Israel.
ESG, Corporate Governance & Future of the Firm
Are American Firms Becoming Politically Polarized?
A new paper examines political polarization among top executives in S&P 1500 firms, highlighting a robust trend toward political polarization in corporate...
Latest news
Antitrust and Competition
Revising the Merger Guidelines To Return Antitrust to a Sound Economic and Legal Foundation
The draft Merger Guidelines largely replace the consumer welfare standard of the Chicago School with the lessening of competition principle found in the 1914 Clayton Act. This shift would enable the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice Antitrust Division to utilize the full extent of modern economics to respond to rising concentration and its harmful effects, writes John Kwoka.
Economic History
How Anthony Downs’s Analysis Explains Rational Voters’ Preferences for Populism
In new research, Cyril Hédoin and Alexandre Chirat use the rational-choice theory of economist Anthony Downs to explain how populism rationally arises to challenge established institutions of liberal democracy.
Antitrust and Competition
The Impact of Large Institutional Investors on Innovation Is Not as Positive as One Might Expect
In a new paper, Bing Guo, Dennis C. Hutschenreiter, David Pérez-Castrillo, and Anna Toldrà-Simats study how large institutional investors impact firm innovation. The authors find that large institutional investors encourage internal research and development but discourage firm acquisitions that would add patents and knowledge to their firms’ portfolios, hampering overall innovation.
Antitrust and Competition
The FTC Needs To Focus Arguments on Technological Transitions After High-Profile Losses
Joshua Gray and Cristian Santesteban argue that the Federal Trade Commission's focus in Meta-Within and Microsoft-Activision on narrow markets like VR fitness apps and consoles missed the boat on the real competition issue: the threat to future competition in nascent markets like VR platforms and cloud gaming.
Commentary
We Need Better Research on the Relationship Between Market Power and Productivity in the Hospital Industry
Antitrust debates have largely ignored questions about the relationship between market power and productivity, and scholars have provided little guidance on the issue due to data limitations. However, data is plentiful on the hospital industry for both market power and operating costs and productivity, and researchers need to take advantage, writes David Ennis.
Antitrust and Competition
Debating the Draft Merger Guidelines: Transcript
On September 7, the Stigler Center hosted a webinar to discuss the draft merger guidelines. What follows is a slightly edited transcript of the event.
Commentary
Holding Up the News
Meta has silenced news organizations’ social media accounts in response to Canada’s Online News Act, a law not yet in effect. Josh Braun describes the reasoning behind such legislation, its potential flaws, and how Meta, particularly Facebook, has turned the Canadian wildfire crisis into a regulatory pressure campaign.
