Differentiating it with respect to α, we obtain
d = 2D2Var(δι)(2α - 1) = 0,
∂α
which has a minimum at α = 2.
Step 2. Define now the liquidity demand of the merged banks as
xma = δ1αDm + δ2(1 - α)Dm ,
when α = 2, and as
Xms = δι Dm + δ2 Dm
xma
fma(Xma )=
α(1-α)Dm |
1 |
(1—α)Dm |
Dm xma |
α(1-α)Dm
when α = 2. Applying the general formula in Bradley and Gupta (2002) to our case,
the density functions of xma and xms can be written as (assume α < 2 without loss of
generality):
for Xma ≤ αDm
for αDm <Xma ≤ (1 - α)Dm
for Xma > (1 - α)Dm ,
4xm
D2
m
fms(Xms) =
4(Dm—xms)
D2
m
for Xms ≤ Dm/2
for Xms > Dm/2.
(16)
Since α < 2, froβ(⅛) is steeper than fms(xms) both for xma ≤ αDm and for xma >
(1 - α)Dm . This implies that the two density functions do not cross in these intervals,
whereas they do it in two points in the interval αDm <Xma ≤ (1 - α)Dm . Given that they
are symmetric around the same mean Dm/2 with V ar (Xma) > V ar (Xms), it is:
F
ma
F
ma
> Fms for Rm < —,
< Fms for Rm > Dm,
(17)
where Fma = Pr(Xma <Rm ) and Fms = Pr(Xms <Rm ).
Denote now as ωma and ωms the expected liquidity needs of the merged banks with asym-
metric deposits and symmetric deposits respectively. We have
ωma - ωms
Z m (Xma
Rm
Rm )fma (Xma)d(Xma) - (Xms
Rm
Rm)fms(Xms)d(Xms )
Xmafma (Xma )d(Xma ) - Xms fms(Xms )d(Xms )
(18)
-Rm(1 - Fma(Rm)) + Rm(1 - Fms(Rm)).
30