Skip to main content

Abstract

The delivery terms of futures contracts specify the types and grades of deliverable goods, and denote the places and times of delivery that must be met to avoid default on an outstanding contract. It is exceedingly difficult to ascertain proper specifications for a futures contract. But if the contractual terms are improperly specified, too few buyers or too few sellers of the contract will appear in the market at any given price, and the contract will fail.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chicago Board of Trade, p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Federal Trade Commission, v. V, p. 199.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See Telser (1981b); Carlton.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pirrong (1991) demonstrates that the effects of supply, demand, and transportation conditions on basis risk are extraordinarily complex and not necessarily stable. A variety of changes in these conditions either singularly or in combination can lead to a decline in the size of a market similar to that experienced by Chicago. The analysis in the 1991 paper demonstrates that in many cases the effect of such an evolution in trading patterns on basis volatility for out-of-position hedgers often cannot be signed a priori even if a single change (e.g., a rise in demand at a single point) is responsible for this shift. When there are multiple causes of such a decline, it is often more difficult to determine whether the decline in a market is associated with a fall or a rise in the hedging performance out-of-position hedgers receive. This hedging performance may vary over time, moreover, due to changes in factors that do not affect market size per se, such as the volatility of demand at a particular location or the volatility of transport rates. Thus one cannot draw the conclusion that the decline in the Chicago market has increased the magnitude of basis risk.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See Milgrom (1981) for a classic exposition of this idea.

    Google Scholar 

  6. There may be dispersion in prices even if transactions costs are zero (see Telser (1978) ch. 8), but the permissible prices would still satisfy the constraint. When search costs are positive, some prices will exceed and some prices will be less than an efficient price.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pirrong, S.C. et al. (1993). The Role of the Futures Delivery Process. In: Grain Futures Contracts: An Economic Appraisal. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-3238-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-3238-5_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-6423-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-3238-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics