Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:51:10.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Effects of Control Status on Commercial Bank Profitability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Extract

In this study, an attempt is made to determine whether the profitability of a commercial bank is related to the bank's ownership-control status. Affiliated and unaffiliated commercial banks in the sample are found to be equiprofitable. Affiliation with a mutual savings bank does not generate differences in profits, total current operating revenues, or total current operating expenses between the two groups of commercial banks. Furthermore, the marginal net earnings or returns on the individual deposit types are the same for the two groups of banks.

The two groups of banks have extreme differences in their holdings of time and savings deposits and real estate loans. These differences between equiprofitable banks require further analysis. The affiliated commercial banks have significantly larger percentages of their total assets in nonearning assets and lower proportions in loans. The affiliated banks also have larger proportions of their deposits in the less costly demand deposits than do the unaffiliated banks. These results indicate that affiliated banks would have both lower revenues and expenses than do unaffiliated commercial banks, ceteris paribus. However, affiliated banks have larger proportions of their portfolios in the greater income-producing consumer and commercial loans.

In conclusion, profitability of the commercial banks in the sample is not affected by the banks' control status. The commercial banks controlled by mutual savings banks are as profitable as banks controlled by management or “independent” owners. However, the control status does effect significant differences in the balance sheet and income statement accounts. While many of these distinctions may result from differences in the banks' deposit structures, these differences themselves are consequences of affiliation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Anderson, T. W.An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958.Google Scholar
[2]Alhadeff, D. A., and Alhadeff, C. P.. “A Note on Bank Earnings and Savings Deposit Rate Policy.” Journal of Finance, September 1959, pp. 403410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Ascheim, J. “Commercial Banks and Financial Intermediaries: Fallacies and Policy Implication.” Journal of Political Economy, February 1959, pp. 5971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Bond, R. E. “Deposit Composition and Commercial Bank Earnings.” Journal of Finance, March 1971, pp. 3950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Carson, D. “Bank Earnings and the Competition for Savings Deposits.” Journal of Political Economy, December 1959, pp. 580588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Dewald, W. G. “Bank Earnings and the Competition for Savings.” Journal of Political Economy, June 1961, pp. 270282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Goldberger, A. S.Econometric Theory. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1964.Google Scholar
[8]Haslem, J. A., and Longbrake, W. A.. “A Note on Average Interest Charges on Bank Loans, The Loan Mix, and Measures of Competition.” Journal of Finance, December 1970, pp. 159164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Horvitz, P. M. “Bank Earnings and the Competition for Savings: A Further Comment.” Journal of Political Economy, February 1962, pp. 8687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Kamerschen, D. R. “The Influence of Ownership and Control on Profit Rates.” American Economic Review, December 1968, pp. 432437.Google Scholar
[11]Kmenta, J.Elements of Econometrics. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1971.Google Scholar
[12]Larner, R. J. “Ownership and Control in the 200 Largest Nonfinancial Corporations, 1929 and 1963.” American Economic Review, September 1966, pp. 777787.Google Scholar
[13]McCall, A. S., and Eisenbeis, R. A.. “Some Effects of Affiliation Among Mutual Savings Banks and Commercial Banks.” Journal of Finance, September 1972, pp. 865877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Monsen, R. J.; Chiu, J. S.; and Cooley, D. E.. “The Effect of Separation of Ownership and Control on the Performance on the Large Firm.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1968, pp. 435451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Vernon, J. R. “Ownership and Control Among Large Member Banks.” Journal of Finance, June 1970, pp. 651657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Vernon, J.R. “Separation of Ownership and Control and Profit Rates, The Evidence from Banking: Comment.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, January 1971, pp. 615625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar