The Effect of ECB Unconventional Monetary Policy on Firms’ Performance during the Global Financial Crisis
, Apostolos Christopoulos 2, Evgenios Gakias 1 and Ioannis Katsampoxakis 3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
General Comment:
The paper examines the impact of some very important factors affecting firms’ profitability in listed Greek firms before and after the global financial crisis, using four different measures of firms’ performance. The particularity of this paper that differentiates it, related to other respective papers, is that it takes into consideration the implementation of an expansionary monetary policy by ECB in order to boost economic activity. The paper’s results show that the unconventional policy contributes to the improvement of firms’ performance and economic stability.
The paper is well structured, the literature review is sufficiently analyzed, including both papers focusing on the period of the global financial crisis and their impact on firms’ performance and more current bibliography, thus covering any research gap. However, I suggest to extent the bibliography and on a sectoral basis as well, in order to enrich and fulfill your paper's literature review.
The policy implications are very clear and perceivable.
The methodology may be simple, but well tested. All diagnostic tests and econometric processes have been conducted and analyzed thoroughly.
The model specification and the tables are well presented.
The results are thoroughly explained, but I suggest the authors write down and combine their findings with other previous works, which agree or contradict with their results. This happens only in one case of their empirical analysis. It would be very contributable for the completion of the paper’s analysis.
Introduction and conclusions are well developed and supported.
I have nothing to say
Author Response
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for reading and commenting on the paper in order to be further improved.
We took into consideration the reviewer’s comments and we proceeded to their as suggested.
1st Comment
The results are thoroughly explained, but I suggest the authors write down and combine their findings with other previous works, which agree or contradict with their results. This happens only in one case of their empirical analysis. It would be very contributable for the completion of the paper’s analysis.
We proceeded to the necessary amendments, additions and changed where required at the regressions analysis section in order to make more clear either the connection or disconnection of our findings with other previous related studies.
2nd Comment
The paper is well structured, the literature review is sufficiently analyzed, including both papers focusing on the period of the global financial crisis and their impact on firms’ performance and more current bibliography, thus covering any research gap. However, I suggest to extent the bibliography and on a sectoral basis as well, in order to enrich and fulfill your paper's literature review.
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comment.
We consider that the introduction and literature review of the paper focus on issues related with the factors affecting firms’ performance (i.e. firms’ size, capital structure, debt rate), based on studies conducted either before or during the financial crisis period and the impact of institutions interference. However, as suggested, we proceeded to a restructuring adding or amending the appropriate international literature review, in order to deepen even more our research.
Moreover, we subjoined at the references part the additional bibliography used and we proceeded to language editing.
Reviewer 2 Report
Please refer to the attached document.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
I am enclosing a memo for the authors' consideration. This paper sheds light on an important question but the connection with the relevant literature should be improved. My comments should be relatively straightforward to address.
Author Response
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for reading and commenting on the paper in order to be further improved.
We took into consideration the reviewer’s comments and we proceeded to the incorporation of most of them as suggested.
1st Comment: Overall assessment
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comment.
We consider that the introduction and literature review of the paper focus on issues related with the factors affecting firms’ performance (i.e. firms’ size, capital structure, debt rate), based on studies conducted either before or during the financial crisis period and the impact of institutions interference. However, as suggested, we proceeded to a restructuring adding or amending the appropriate international literature review, in order to deepen even more our research.
Moreover, we subjoined at the references part the additional bibliography used and we proceeded to language editing.
2nd Comment: The role of monetary policy spillovers
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comment.
We proceeded to the suggested amendments and additions related with the role of monetary policy spillover at the parts of introduction and literature review, in order to fulfill our analysis.
3nd Comment: The effects of monetary and fiscal policies on the banking sectors of Eurozone countries
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comment.
We proceeded to the suggested amendments and additions related with the issue of the effects of monetary policy on the banking sector, in order to fulfill our analysis.
4th Comment: The real effects of policy uncertainty
The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comment.
The comment is very useful. However, we consider that the policy uncertainty issues outrun the needs, contribution and the goal of this study. As it is stated at the end of the paper (conclusions) it is a very interesting issue, which has been added, with the reviewer’s gentle exhortation, for a future research extension and approach, as it deepens on issues of labor economics.
