Search results

Open innovation is of crucial importance for all companies operating in the economics of widely distributed knowledge. However, the effects of its disclosure remain largely uncharted in the case of service companies. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to measure the impact of open innovation announcements on the market value (MV) of service enterprises.

The research covered 398 open innovation announcements released by service companies. It was conducted in the whole of the European Union in the period February 2011-December 2016. The data were analysed in the short and long term with the use of event-study and buy-and-hold methods.

The results indicated the significant positive effect of open innovation disclosure in both short and long term. At the same time, the market was not able to immediately fully value the information in the short run and tended to overestimate the positive effect of the innovation announced. No significant leakage and dissemination effects were observed prior to the announcement. There was no significant difference in the magnitude of positive and negative reactions to the releases.

From the point of view of business practice the research proved the benefits of information disclosure and supported the long-term planning. From the investors’ viewpoint, it signalled the small risk of significant fluctuations resulting from aggressive trading prior to the announcement and unwinding part of the acquired position afterwards.

The paper attempts to fulfil the research gap on the impact of the announcements on open innovation on the MV of companies.

This paper examines the effect which the rent assessment process has on the level of rents and rental values in the commercial property market in England and Wales, by asking: is there an accepted definition of open market rental value which is consistently adhered to, irrespective of the context in which the rent is assessed? How, in theory, do the procedures by which an assessment of open market rental value is arrived at differ as between a new letting, a lease renewal, and a rent review? Is there any evidence to suggest that any theoretical differences in the operation of the various rent assessment procedures are borne out in practice? In particular, is there any evidence that in new lettings and lease renewals lease terms are changed after the rent has been finalised? Is there any evidence to demonstrate that there are different levels of rent which are sufficiently consistent to be referable to the context in which the rent was assessed? If so, does this produce difficulties in the valuation process which may not be presently fully appreciated? In addition to a review of the relevant literature, the primary research undertaken for the study was a survey of surveyors and solicitors involved in commercial lettings and rent reviews and the compilation of a database of rental valuations and transactions.

Time on the market (TOM) has been widely tested in the US real estate literature using listing and selling data of houses captured in the multiple listing services (MLSs). Unfortunately in the UK there are no MLSs so it is not possible to undertake similar analyses. The approach adopted in this paper differs from traditional TOM analyses in that it focuses on the speed or time the market takes to correct for information differences between open market valuations and traded prices. In this context the paper introduces the concept of equilibrium time on the market (ETOM). The study therefore adopts a different approach to estimating TOM and in addition also examines the phenomenon within the UK commercial real estate sector. Based on a simple present value model, the time taken for the difference between an appraiser's estimate of open market value and known selling prices define our time on the market under equilibrium market conditions. Using the annualised UK Investment Property Databank all‐property total return index for a sample period of 17 years between 1983 and 1999, the average ETOM was estimated to be 8.4 months. This figure, however, varied and depended on market conditions.

Examines the methodological issues that arise in generating standardised transaction data for use in analysing the determinants of retail rents. Looks at the issues raised by the use of comparative information and the existence of widely accepted conventions for adjusting comparative evidence to allow for the specific physical and legal characteristics of individual properties. Concludes by questioning the need to test valuation convention against market evidence and the notion of open market value is reassessed.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.