Search results

Small firms, which represent much of the Silicon Valley region, tend to experience losses due to their small scale, small customer base and lack of diversification. The authors study the impact of accounting conservatism and losses on firm value and as such this study is an appropriate addition to this growing field of financial management.

The authors use methodology developed in prior literature to examine Silicon Valley and non-Silicon Valley firms' and their behavior when facing losses and the factors, which might play a role in their valuation. The authors focus particularly on earnings and accounting conservatism. Accounting conservatism captures how fast firms record losses relative to gains. The faster losses are recognized than gains the more accounting conservatism is exhibited. The authors examine the seemingly unrelated estimation of differences in means for our independent variables of interest across the two samples of Silicon Valley and non-Silicon Valley firms, both earnings and accounting conservatism. The authors use matched sample analysis of these firms based on four digit SIC code, size and date. In robustness, the authors run a more in-depth propensity score matched sample analysis.

The authors document that market values of Silicon Valley firms with accounting losses are affected less by negative earnings than other firms with accounting losses in the United States outside of the Silicon Valley region, noting the “lose big, win bigger” sentiment of Silicon Valley. Additionally, the authors document that accounting conservatism does play a role in influencing valuations of companies with accounting losses both in Silicon Valley and the rest of the United States, marginally more for Silicon Valley firms.

This study would be of interest to fund managers who need to consider smaller firms for inclusion in their portfolios. A lot of small firms have experienced losses ever since going public, especially Silicon Valley start-up firms.

We extend the recent literature concerning accounting based valuation models to investigate financial firms from six European countries with substantial financial sectors: France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK. Not only are these crucial industries worthy of study in their own right, but unusual accounting practices, and inter‐country differences in those accounting practices, provide valuable insights into the accounting‐value relationship. Our sample consists of 7,714 financial firm/years observations from 1,140 companies drawn from 1989–2000. Sub‐samples include 1,309 firm/years for banks, 650 for insurance companies, 1,705 for real estate firms, and 3,239 for investment companies. In most countries we find that the valuation models work as well or better in explaining cross‐sectional variations in the market‐to‐book ratio for financial firms as they do for industrial and commercial firms in the same countries, although Switzerland is an exception to this generalization. As expected, the results are sensitive to industrial differences, accounting regulation and accounting practices. In particular, marking assets to market value reduces the relevance of earnings figures and increases that of equity.

This paper aims to understand how social finance and impact measurement experts include stakeholders' voices in valuations of social and environmental impact.

The paper used the content analysis of an online discussion forum where experts discussed impact valuation approaches.

Many experts seek impact valuations that take into account the experiences of those whose lives are most affected. Ideally, these accounts need to be emic to (in the language of) those stakeholders, and polyvocal (representing many different stakeholders' voices). However, these experts also seek to effect systemic change by encouraging mainstream financial markets to use social and environmental valuations in their decision-making. These experts consider full plurality too complex to be useable by financial markets, so the experts argue in favor of etic valuations (stated in the language of investors), to appeal to mainstream finance, while endeavoring nonetheless to represent multiple stakeholders' voices. The authors identify two discursive strategies used to resolve this tension: effacing of differences between diverse stakeholders, and overstating the universality of money as a common language.

The terms emic and polyvocal provide experts with nuanced ways to understand “stakeholder voice.” The authors hope these nuances inspire new insights and strategies and help the community with their goal of bridging to mainstream finance.

The paper presents a theoretical framework for describing plurality in impact valuations and examines the challenges of bridging from social finance, which seeks to give voice and representation to those whose lives are most affected, to mainstream finance.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze media storytelling and rhetoric surrounding the credibility of the longstanding accounting practice of mark‐to‐market valuation.

The cascading storytelling model of progressive framing by the media of mark‐to‐market valuation was applied to story subsets of the three types of classic Aristotelian rhetorical appeals.

The authors found that the media blamed the accounting profession's mark‐to‐market valuation practices as substantive cause of recent corporate problems and declines in market values. In addition, the rhetorical framing of mark‐to‐market accounting practices in the media prompted the Financial Accounting Standards Board to a rush to judgment.

The paper is limited to the analysis of the storytelling included. Different results from other sources may provide another result.

The failure in the media to address the duality between the logos of accounting and the ethos of the media narratives exacerbated the cascading activation. Understanding this duality may provide a different lens in looking at information dissemination. This is not only relative to stakeholders in making more informed decisions but should also serve as a warning to the profession, to have more voice, to use a rhetorical strategy that can have more saliency in the public arena.

The paper examined storytelling as interplay of retrospective narrative, the presentness of living story, and the antenarratives shaping the future of not only the unfolding economic crisis, but the future of accounting itself. In terms of rhetoric, we extended the application of pathos, ethos, and logos by examining a cascading activation theory model. This is one of the few studies of antenarratives and how through cascade rhetoric the future is shaped.

This paper aims to investigate how sell-side analysts form expectations on, analyse, and communicate the effects of corporate acquisitions.

The paper reports on case studies of three listed firms who are frequent acquirers. The case data comprise semi-structured interviews and content analysis of analyst reports and corporate reports.

The paper reports three sets of findings. First, the analysts viewed acquisitions as heterogeneous events and, therefore, also treated acquisitions differently depending on factors such as size and acquisition strategy and the perceived “authenticity” of the acquisition (i.e. whether parts of the acquisition would be more accurately described as organic growth and regular capital expenditure (CAPEX) investments). Second, the authors find that analysts struggle with analysing the effects of acquisitions at the announcement date because of a mismatch between the analysts’ need of and the analysts’ access to relevant information. Although clients demand evaluations of announced acquisitions, relevant accounting information is not published until much later and the information at hand only allows for cursory analyses. Finally, the authors find that the analysts’ valuation models were too inflexible to fully incorporate the effects of the acquisition. In sum, the analysts, therefore, developed acquisition-driven investment cases without supporting accounting information and without converting expected acquisitions into forecasts.

By adopting a qualitative case study research design, the paper contributes to the ongoing efforts to open the “black-box” of sell-side analyst behaviour. In particular, the unique research design focusses on effects related to specific corporate events (acquisitions) rather than analysts’ everyday work.

Enhanced business reporting (EBR) seeks to address the information needs of investors when making company valuations for investment decisions. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relevance for market valuation of EBR disclosures that are directly related to firm valuation (value-based reporting (VBR)).

Data are hand collected from annual reports of German publicly listed companies over five years. The content analysis is based on the valuation-related disclosure framework of the German Schmalenbach Society of Business Administration. A 2SLS approach accounts for potential endogeneity.

Share-based compensation, leverage, corporate size, and share volatility are significant determinants of VBR. The level of VBR is significantly associated with market values and provides additional market value explanatory power, indicating its relevance to investors in the process of valuation and decision making. Also, the relevance of book value and earnings for explaining market values increases for firms with better VBR. The findings are robust to the exclusion of banks and assurance companies and to alternative model and variable specifications.

The research contributes to the literature on voluntary disclosures by testing an EBR framework explicitly derived from valuation theory. The results provide indirect evidence of the investors’ use of respective valuation techniques in decision making. A contribution is made to the value relevance literature by showing that valuation-related disclosures constitute a suitable proxy for “other information” in the Ohlson’s (1995) model. Such disclosures complement traditional accounting metrics, i.e. book value and earnings, as basis for valuations. Potential caveats relate to the content analysis of annual reports and the endogeneity of voluntary disclosures.

This paper informs the debate on further developments of EBR in helping to identify important components thereof.

The purpose of this paper is to identify brand management accounting as a further approach to accounting for brands and to suggest a number of possible measurement metrics it might incorporate.

The paper is discursive in nature, developing a critique of existing approaches to accounting for brands before considering a number of attributes of a new approach.

The growing importance of brands as a key source of competitive advantage has been among the most visible changes in many business organisations in recent years. Effective strategic brand management, therefore, poses a major challenge to both accountants and their marketing colleagues. To date, the history of accounting for brands has largely been concerned with the derivation of brand valuations suitable for financial accounting and reporting purposes. Although the merits of a management accounting perspective on brands have been recognised for some time, recent studies indicate that to date it has failed to attract much support. New approaches to accounting for brands are now required. Underpinned by high levels of interfunctional cooperation between management accounting and marketing management practitioners, brand management accounting examplifies the more inclusive approach to the task of strategic management increasingly evident within contemporary organisations.

The paper integrates both existing and new insights informed by the accounting and marketing literatures in an attempt to promote a further approach to the task of accounting for brands.

Examines the various brand asset recognition methods used by the accounting profession, within their existing rules, to highlight, first, the restrictive nature of a brand asset’s current attachment to purchased goodwill and, second, the restrictive requirement for brand asset recognition to be derived solely from a “transaction or event”. Then examines the latest rule change, FRS10, to assess whether the recognition of brand assets is likely to remain restrictive in the future. It concurs with Murphy’s view that brand asset recognition on the balance still continues to be an accounting exercise which is “fudged”.

The purpose of this paper is to examine prominent issues and knowledge contributions from research exploring the nexus between accounting and the business of sport, overview the other papers presented in this AAAJ Special Issue and draw from this work to scope out future impactful research opportunities in this area.

A review and examination of the prior literature and the other papers published in this AAAJ Special Issue.

The paper identifies and summarises three key research themes in the extant literature: financial regulation and assurance; commercialisation and professionalism; and accountability and control. Then it draws from work within these research themes to set out four broad areas for future impactful research.

The value of this paper rests with collating and synthesising several important research issues on the nexus between accounting (broadly defined) and the business of sport, and in prompting future extensions of this work through setting out areas for further innovative accounting research on sport.

The research examined in this paper and the future research avenues proposed are highly relevant to administrators and regulators in sport. They also offer important insights into matters of accounting, accountability, valuation and control more generally.

This paper adds to vibrant existing streams of research in the area by bringing together authors from different areas of accounting research for this AAAJ Special Issue. In scoping out an agenda for impactful research at the intersection of accounting and sport, this paper also draws attention to underexplored issues pertaining to the rise of integrity and accountability concerns in sport, strategic choices in financial regulation, valuation issues and practices and the rise of technology in sport.

The purpose of this paper is to report the outcome of an interdisciplinary discussion on the concepts of profit and profitability and various ways in which we could potentially problematize these concepts. It is our hope that a much greater attention or reconsideration of the problematization of profit and related accounting numbers will be fostered in part by the exchanges we include here.

This paper adopts an interdisciplinary discussion approach and brings into conversation ideas and views of several scholars on problematizing profit and profitability in various contexts and explores potential implications of such problematization.

Profit and profitability measures make invisible the collective endeavour of people who work hard (backstage) to achieve a desired profit level for a division and/or an organization. Profit tends to preclude the social process of debate around contradictions among the ends and means of collective activity. An inherent message that we can discern from our contributors is the typical failure of managers to appreciate the value of critical theory and interpretive research for them. Practitioners and positivist researchers seem to be so influenced by neo-liberal economic ideas that organizations are distrusted and at times reviled in their attachment to profit.

Problematizing opens-up the potential for interesting and significant theoretical insights. A much greater pragmatic and theoretical reconsideration of profit and profitability will be fostered by the exchanges we include here.

In setting out a future research agenda, this paper fosters theoretical and methodological pluralism in the research community focussing on problematizing profit and profitability in various settings. The discussion perspectives offered in this paper provides not only a basis for further research in this critical area of discourse and regulation on the role and status of profit and profitability but also emancipatory potential for practitioners (to be reflective of their practices and their undesired consequences of such practices) whose overarching focus is on these accounting numbers.