Search results

This paper aims to contrast the financial costs and benefits of leasing, rather than owning real estate assets.

The main argument is that leasing is beneficial. The hypothesis is tested using a total of 2,343 UK‐quoted companies over the period 1989‐2002, resulting in 14,101 pooled time‐series and cross‐sectional observations.

The results indicate that large and high‐growth companies are likely to lease than to own these assets. Companies that lease are more efficient in using their real estate and that these benefits are compounded in share price valuation as leasing propensity is strongly leasing propensity is not linear, but an inverse U‐shaped, suggesting that the market is also considering the costs of not owning real estate.

The study relied on historical accounting values of real estate rather than market values which are not available in machine readable format, and there was no data on the type of real estate and its location.

The results of the paper provide strong and consistent evidence that the market values the costs and benefits of leasing.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the short‐term trading behaviour of A shares owned by domestic investors and their dually‐traded B shares owned by foreign investors, after a period of significant price change.

Given that the fundamentals of A and B shares are the same, the paper tests the hypothesis that both types of stocks should behave homogeneously either by exhibiting a momentum behaviour or an over‐reaction pattern. The paper relates any deviations in post‐shock stock returns to the differences in the trading patterns of foreign relative to domestic investors.

While the prices of the A shares are relatively random after the event, those of the B shares carry on increasing significantly after both positive and negative shocks. This trend is more pronounced for large firms with high liquidity, in contrast to the efficient market hypothesis expectations, which suggests that any abnormal performance should be arbitraged away sooner in a frictionless (in this case liquid) market.

The paper relates these results to the high level of optimism of foreign investors, which is an under‐researched area in behaviour finance.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce concepts of branding applicable to the corporate real estate management (CREM) service and present early results of a study of branding concepts to address a credibility‐positioning problem in CREM.

The paper presents case studies of CREM in Australia and Malaysia analysed from the branding perspective.

It is found that the CREM credibility‐positioning problem inside organisations depends not only on the technical performance of CREM service, but also involves the relationship between CREM and its customers.

These are the early results of a study limited to a few case studies selected from four industry sectors in two different countries. Further findings might explain cross‐cultural perceptions for CREM's credibility‐positioning in emerging and mature real estate markets.

The research clearly identified the application of branding elements in CREM's relationship with customers. The findings of this paper are useful to CREM executives in increasing their credibility in their organisations.

The paper introduces branding theory as being useful and important in CREM practice.

Some companies see property as a strategic resource that can add value to corporate performance; others view it as a commodity that more often acts as a barrier to core business activities. In both instances, insufficient forward planning often prevents companies from making the most of their property portfolios and avoiding unnecessary costs. This paper looks at how operational property portfolios can be classified according to their strategic significance to the business and, specifically, how occupiers can more closely align property holdings with core business objectives by differentiating between ‘core’, ‘tactical’ and ‘(semi)surplus’ properties. The paper focuses specifically on the topical issue of flexibility, identifying potential costs and considering whether and to what extent short leases and break clauses are worth paying for. It also contains a large number of practical tips for managing real estate liabilities and making assets perform better.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of insider trading on subsequent stock returns in the UK, with a specific focus on the impact of the global financial crisis of 2007-2008 on the relation between CEO and CFO stock purchases and returns.

The empirical analysis uses 10,230 purchases executed in 679 UK firms by 1,477 directors during the period from 2000 to 2010. Subsequent market-adjusted stock returns are regressed on a set of firm-specific accounting, market and corporate governance variables as well as the characteristics of CEOs and CFOs. Additionally, the analysis distinguishes between the opportunistic and routine trades.

The findings reveal that the position of the trading director and the nature of their trades are important in determining the impact on returns of insider trades. In particular, CEO purchases are on the whole more informative than CFO purchases and opportunistic purchases. The trades in the post-crisis period have a greater impact on subsequent stock returns.

The empirical analysis is limited to the trades made by two executives. Future research should consider inside trades by all directors and distinguish between executive and non-executive directors. Also, a behavioral measure should be developed to test if the financial crisis affected the trading behavior of directors and whether directors use insider trading strategically to signal information to the market.

The impact of directors’ dealings on stock returns is not homogeneous. Financial analysts and investors should pay more attention to different types of trades and the identity of trading director.

This paper, to the authors’ knowledge, provides the first attempt that combines in the same framework the identity and personal attributes of trading executive directors, firm-level corporate governance features, the nature of purchase transactions and the trading period characteristics. Furthermore the empirical analysis is carried out during a period that also covers the recent global financial crisis period and its immediate aftermath.