7,649
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Effect of Leverage Buyouts on Innovation (view source)
Revision as of 15:01, 10 July 2020
, 15:01, 10 July 2020→Beyond JF
Responses:
*Josh's first and fourth comments appear somewhat disingenuous. We made a great play of how it was important to isolate public-to-private transactions and not mix them as he has done. Mixing provides the opposite results, which is good press for the industry... So let's ignore those comments.
*We address an outlier firm without naming it on page 23 ("One firm held 426 patents...") and page 28 ("Our mean sell-off statistic includes, but is not driven by, a single leveraged buyout selling 798 patents – this is the same firm that went on to have 426 patents by the end of the yearof its buyout, shown in Table 4."). Going through the data, this firm is OWEN-ILLINOIS INC, and the sale was of 767 patents, not 798. Seagate is in the original dataset as SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY PLC (gvkey=150937) and SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY-OLD (gvkey=9545). Neither of these records are marked as having had an LBO. We should look at the source data to see if there is some reason why Seagate isn't in our dataset.
*If spinoffs were being assigned patents, and these assignments were recorded by the USPTO, we would see them as sales in our data. We may want to add a comment to this effect.
*Yes, the industry categories are quite broad. We could spend eternity exploring the matching procedure, so let's ignore that one.
