Managerial discretion to delay the recognition of goodwill impairment: The role of enforcement

Under International Financial Reporting Standards, managers can use two approaches to increase the estimated fair value of goodwill in order to justify not recognizing impairment: (1) make overly optimistic valuation assumptions, and (2) increase future cash flow forecasts by inflating current cash flows. Because enforcement constrains the use of optimistic valuation assumptions, we hypothesize that enforcement influences the relative use of these two choices. We test this hypothesis by comparing a sample of 1,958 firms from 36 countries that are likely to delay recognizing goodwill impairment (suspect firms) to a sample of control firms. First, we find that firms in high‐enforcement countries use a higher discount rate to test goodwill for impairment than firms in low‐enforcement countries. We also find a more positive association between discount rate and upward cash flow management for suspect firms than for control firms. This result is consistent with suspect firms substituting optimistic valuation assumptions with inflated current cash flows. Second, we find that, relative to control firms, suspect firms exhibit higher upward cash flow management in high‐enforcement countries than in low‐enforcement countries. Third, we show that suspect firms in high‐enforcement countries are more likely to eventually impair goodwill.     

The Role of Real Options in Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice1

Most discussions of capital budgeting take for granted that discounted cash flow (DCF) and real options valuation (ROV) are very different methods that are meant to be applied in different circumstances. Such discussions also typically assume that DCF is “easy” and ROV is “hard”—or at least dauntingly unfamiliar—and that, mainly for this reason, managers often use DCF and rarely ROV. This paper argues that all three assumptions are wrong or at least seriously misleading. DCF and ROV both assign a present value to risky future cash flows. DCF entails discounting expected future cash flows at the expected return on an asset of comparable risk. ROV uses “risk‐neutral” valuation, which means computing expected cash flows based on “risk‐neutral” probabilities and discounting these flows at the risk‐free rate. Using a series of single‐period examples, the author demonstrates that both methods, when done correctly, should provide the same answer. Moreover, in most ROV applications—those where there is no forward price or “replicating portfolio” of traded assets—a “preliminary” DCF valuation is required to perform the risk‐neutral valuation. So why use ROV at all? In cases where project risk and the discount rates are expected to change over time, the risk‐neutral ROV approach will be easier to implement than DCF (since adjusting cash flow probabilities is more straightforward than adjusting discount rates). The author uses multi‐period examples to illustrate further both the simplicity of ROV and the strong assumptions required for a typical DCF valuation. But the simplicity that results from discounting with risk‐free rates is not the only benefit of using ROV instead of—or together with—traditional DCF. The use of formal ROV techniques may also encourage managers to think more broadly about the flexibility that is (or can be) built into future business decisions, and thus to choose from a different set of possible investments. To the extent that managers who use ROV have effectively adopted a different business model, there is a real and important difference between the two valuation techniques. Consistent with this possibility, much of the evidence from both surveys and academic studies of managerial behavior and market pricing suggests that managers and investors implicitly take account of real options when making investment decisions.     

Valuation in Emerging Markets: A Simulation Approach

Most of the foundations of valuation theory have been designed for use in developed markets. Because of the greater, and in some cases different, risks associated with emerging markets (although recent experience might suggest otherwise), investors and corporate managers are often uncomfortable using traditional methods. The typical way of capturing emerging-market risks is to increase the discount rate in the standard valuation model. But, as the authors argue, such adjustments have the effect of undermining some of the basic assumptions of the CAPM-based discounted cash flow model. The standard theory of capital budgeting suggests that estimates of unconditional expected cash flows should be discounted at CAPM discount rates (or betas) that reflect only “systematic,” or “nondiversifiable,” market-wide risks. In practice, however, analysts tend to take what are really estimates of “conditional” expected cash flows—that is, conditional on the firm or its country avoiding a crisis—and discount them at higher rates that reflect not only systematic risks, but diversifiable risks that typically involve a higher probability of crisis-driven costs of default. But there is almost no basis in theory for the size of the increases in discount rates. In this article, the authors propose that analysts in emerging markets avoid this discount rate problem by using simulation techniques to capture emerging-market risks in their estimates of unconditional expected cash flows—in other words, estimates that directly incorporate the possibility of an emerging-market crisis and its consequences. Having produced such estimates, analysts can then discount them using the standard Global CAPM.     

Beta Geared and Ungeared: Further Analysis of the Case of Active Debt Management

This paper extends previous work by Appleyard and Strong (1989) concerned with the implications of an active debt management policy (ADMP) for de-gearing a geared firm's equity beta. First, alternative derivations of the ADMP beta de-gearing formulae for an MM perfect capital market with corporation tax and for a world with corporation and personal taxes are presented. These derivations do not require the assumption of level perpetuity expected cash flows and therefore indicate a broader basis for the ADMP beta de-gearing formulae than previously demonstrated. Secondly, possible investor valuation errors from use of a PDMP (passive debt management policy) valuation methodology to value firms pursuing an ADMP are analysed in the context of an MM perfect capital market with corporation tax. Given constant (or zero) growth in the firm's expected unlevered cash flows, this analysis indicates that degearing errors from use of the PDMP beta de-gearing formula will only be associated with valuation errors if there is a change in the firm's target debt ratio and that the significance of such valuation errors will be largely dependent on the expected growth rate.     

Value Under Active and Passive Debt Management Policy

The relationship between debt policy and valuation has been extensively analysed in the finance literature; within a Modigliani-Miller framework, the consensus is that valuation is affected by whether debt is managed actively or passively, and that for finite projects with time varying risky cash flows, it is appropriate to use a weighted average discount rate for valuation only if it is assumed that debt is actively managed. In this paper, the relationship between debt policy and valuation is re-examined. In particular, it is shown that, under one of the most plausible forms of passive debt policy, valuation using a simple weighted average discount rate is in fact possible.     

Incorporating Competition into the APV Technique for Valuing Leveraged Transactions

According to a recent survey, the discounted cash flow approach is the valuation technique most widely used by companies evaluating acquisition targets. But because the DCF approach is inappropriate when the capital structure is changing during the forecast period, many analysts turn to the adjusted present value (APV) approach, which can easily accommodate a changing capital structure. Still, the finance literature has not shown how to incorporate assumptions about the effect of competition in the post-forecast period into an APV analysis.
This paper provides two new tools for calculating horizon values with changing leverage and competition. First, it provides a new model, based on more realistic assumptions, for valuing a growing annuity of free cash flows when ROIC is expected to decline due to competition. Second, it provides a model for valuing tax shields that correctly incorporates the impact of competition in the post-forecast period. When used together with the APV approach, these two new tools allow an analyst to estimate the value of a company with a changing capital structure that faces competition in the post-forecast period.     

An Improved Method for Valuing Mature Companies and Estimating Terminal Value

The theory underlying Discounted cash flow (DCF) models is uncontroversial in academia, the economic intuition behind them is straightforward, and the mathematics reassuringly simple. Nevertheless, in practice, they are applied inconsistently with very different valuation results. Because of the assumed infinite life (“going concern”) of a business enterprise, DCF models implicitly assume the ability to forecast future cash flows forever. This forces analysts to make assumptions about the terminal period using simplistic metrics such as P/E or EV/EBITDA to estimate terminal values or to embed a perpetual stream of excess profitability and value creation in the terminal period. The author offers an uncomplicated alternative to these unrealistic assumptions. The first step is to introduce an adjustable fade rate called f. A fade rate of 100% brings about immediate convergence, and a fade rate of 0% specifies no fade and perpetual excess profitability. The notion that excess profits get competed away over time can be modeled by assuming that the spread of (ROIC ‐ r) fades to zero and that economic profit dissipates. Intrinsic value is very sensitive to the fade rate assumption and this helps explain the risk premium for quality stocks. The risk of owning quality stocks is that they lose their economic moat and competitive advantage. An adjustable fade rate provides an excellent means to value the effect of profitability attenuation in a DCF model.     

Accounting for Risk and Return in Equity Valuation

Standard valuation models forecast cash flows or earnings, add a growth rate, and discount the cash flows to their present value with a discount rate that typically reflects the cost of capital. But as the author argues, projecting the long‐term growth rate is essentially speculative; and along with uncertainty about the growth rate, analysts generally do not have a good grasp of the discount rate either. Thus, instead of reducing uncertainty, these two features effectively compound uncertainty in valuations in the sense that slight changes in the growth rate or discount rate can change the valuation considerably. In this article, the author proposes an alternative approach that views the investor's problem as one of challenging the speculations that are built into the current market price, particularly the speculation about growth. Rather than building in a speculative growth rate (and thereby treating it as if it were a certainty), the author's approach turns the problem on its head by using an accounting analysis of the firm's current earnings and cash flows that provides a basis for recognizing the speculative component of the current stock price. More specifically, the author's analysis identifies the future earnings growth path that is implied by the market price, which can then be evaluated with the question: Do I want to pay for this growth? Because growth expectations are risky, additional analysis can be used to provide an understanding of the risk and return to buying growth, and of the upside and downside if risk growth expectations are not realized. By taking such an approach, investors incorporate their understanding of risk not by increasing the discount rate, but by recognizing that the primary risk in investing is the risk of overpaying for growth.     

Discounting expected values with parameter uncertainty

In valuing future cash flows, the standard practice is to take the current cash flow and then extrapolate at an expected growth rate, which can vary at different points in time. This practice stems from the standard way of dealing with time value of money problems under certainty. However, with uncertain cash flows, this practice underestimates the expected cash flows when the growth rates are serially correlated. As a result, both value and the equity cost, calculated as an internal rate of return, are biased low. Given the prevalence of serial correlation in the economy, this paper demonstrates how to incorporate the effects of serial correlation in a simple way and demonstrates by way of a simulation that the effects can be significant. As a result, it casts doubt on the usefulness of several standard valuation approaches and results.     

Corporate taxes,capital structure,and valuation: Combining Modigliani/Miller and Miles/Ezzell

The valuation of a firm with discounted cash flow (DCF) approaches requires assumptions about the firm’s financing strategy. The approaches of Modigliani and Miller and Miles and Ezzell assume that either a passive debt management with predetermined debt levels or active debt management with capital structure targets is applied. Over the last decades, various extensions of these approaches have been developed to allow for a more realistic depiction of financial decision making. However, recent empirical analyses indicate that current theories still have limited power to explain large variances in capital structure across time. We provide an alternative explanation for the empirical observation by assuming that firms combine both capital structure targets and predetermined debt within future periods, and we show how to value a firm given such a partially active debt management. The approaches of Modigliani and Miller and Miles and Ezzell are embedded into a common valuation framework, with the familiar valuation formulas shown as special cases. In a simulation analysis, we illustrate that the textbook valuation formulas may produce considerable valuation errors if a firm applies a partially active debt management.     

The use of earnings and cash flows in investment decisions in the U.S. and Mexico: Experimental evidence

In this study, we investigate which of two accounting performance measures, earnings or cash flows, is used more in valuation decisions by non-professional investors in the United States and in Mexico. This issue is relevant for the Mexican Stock Market (Bolsa Mexicana de Valores) because the Bolsa's growth has stagnated compared with markets of other Latin American countries. Results of the study reveal that the majority of participants in the U.S. rely on earnings while the majority of participants in Mexico rely on cash flows. Results also suggest that the users’ predisposition can be dysfunctional to the extent that they do not consider using the other accounting measure, even when doing so made it easier to arrive at the correct valuation result (i.e. they did not choose to use the more persistent and therefore easier to forecast accounting measure). However, results are mixed for participants using earnings, since we document a higher chance of forecasting errors for participants in both countries when using earnings rather than cash flows in their calculations for the failure of these participants to adjust earnings for depreciation.This study extends the existing international literature by documenting a country-specific predisposition to use cash flows or earnings as a valuation tool by non-professional investors. Moreover, this study also shows that this predisposition can be dysfunctional, leading participants to make incorrect valuation decisions as a result of their failure to consider the differential persistence of the two accounting measures presented in the experiment.     

The effect of financial constraints,investment policy,product market competition and corporate governance on the value of cash holdings

This study empirically investigates the value shareholders place on excess cash holdings and how shareholders’ valuation of cash holdings is associated with financial constraints, firm growth, cash‐flow uncertainty and product market competition for Australian firms from 1990 to 2007. Our results indicate that the marginal value of cash holdings to shareholders declines with larger cash holdings and higher leverage. However, firms that are more financially constrained, that have higher growth rates and that face greater uncertainty exhibit a higher marginal value of cash holdings. These findings are consistent with the explanation that excess cash holdings are not necessarily detrimental to firm value. Firms with costly external financing and that also save more cash for current operating and future investing needs find that the market values these cash hoarding policies favourably. Finally, there is limited evidence of an association between various corporate governance measures and the value of cash holdings for a shorter sample period.     

How Do Investment Banks Value Initial Public Offerings (IPOs)?

Abstract:  We investigate the valuation and the pricing of initial public offerings (IPOs) by investment banks for a unique dataset of 49 IPOs on Euronext Brussels in the 1993–2001 period. We find that for each IPO several valuation methods are used, of which Discounted Free Cash Flow (DFCF) is the most popular. The offer price is mainly based on DFCF valuation, to which a discount is applied. Our results suggest that DDM tends to underestimate value, while DFCF produces unbiased value estimates. When using multiples, investment banks rely mostly on future earnings and cash flows. Multiples based on post-IPO forecasted earnings and cash flows result in more accurate valuations.     

A Rude Awakening: Internet Shakeout in 2000

This study explores various value-drivers of business-to-consumer (B2C) Internet companies' share prices both before and after the market correction in the spring of 2000. Although many market observers had predicted that the shakeout would eventually occur (e.g., Perkins and Perkins 1999), the ultimate and previously unanswered challenge lay identifying which stocks would fall and which ones would survive the shakeout. We develop an empirical valuation model and provide evidence that the Internet stocks that this model suggests were relatively over-valued prior to the Internet stock market correction experienced relatively larger drops in their price-to-sales ratios when the shakeout occurred. This result is robust to the inclusion of competing explanatory variables suggested by the economics literature related to industry rationalizations.We examine the ability of a valuation model comprised of both financial (accounting) variables and nonfinancial web traffic metrics to explain Internet companies' market values during each of 1999 and 2000. Our findings suggest that the reach and stickiness web traffic performance measures are value-relevant to the share prices of Internet companies in each of 1999 and 2000. Our findings of significance for the year 2000 contradict the recent claims of some analysts that web traffic measures are no longer important. We also explore the valuation role of our proxy for B2C companies' current rate of cash burn and find that this proxy is a significant value-driver in each of 1999 and 2000, but with differential valuation implications for each period. Our results suggest that the market was favorably disposed towards Internet companies' aggressive cash expenditures in 1999, but appeared to adopt a more critical view of Internet companies' cash burn rates in 2000. Our results further suggest that investors adopted a more skeptical attitude towards expenditures on intangible investments as the Internet sector began to mature. We find that investors appear to implicitly capitalize product development (R&D) and advertising expenses (customer acquisition costs) during the earlier period when the market was more optimistic about the prospects of B2C companies. However, only product development costs are implicitly capitalized into value, on average, subsequent to the shakeout in the spring of 2000. Finally, we provide statistical evidence to support the conjecture that different parameter vectors characterize the estimated market valuation models for each of 1999 and 2000. Overall, our study provides a preliminary view of the shakeout and maturation of one of the most important New Economy industries to emerge to date–the Internet.     

Using accounting information for consumption planning and equity valuation

This article develops a consumption-based valuation model that treats earnings and cash flow as complementary information sources. The model integrates three ideas that do not appear in traditional valuation models: (i) earnings provide information about future shocks to cash flow; (ii) earnings contain indiscernible transient accruals; and (iii) investors use cash flow and earnings to make allocation and consumption decisions and set price. Accordingly, the quality of earnings affects production and consumption as well as price. Among other implications, the model reveals that a valuation coefficient is not just a capitalization factor; it is the product of a capitalization factor and a structural factor reflecting earnings quality and accounting bias.     

Has the value of cash increased over time?

We document a dramatic increase in the market valuation of cash holdings of US firms from 1988 to 2013. The value of one dollar of cash has increased by $0.019 per year during the period, indicating that shareholders place more value on cash in recent years. We also find that the increasing trend in cash value is driven mainly by increases in institutional shareholdings and accounting conservatism. We further decompose cash change into cash flows from operation (CFO) and cash flows from investing and financing activities, and find that CFO is a significant driver of the increasing trend in cash value.     

What do accruals tell us about future cash flows?

Our model, which is adapted from Feltham and Ohlson (Contemp Account Res 11:689–731, 1995) and Ohlson (Contemp Account Res 11:661–687, 1995) and extends Dechow and Dichev (Account Rev 77:35–59, 2002), characterizes the information about future cash flows reflected in accruals. It reveals investors can extract from accruals information about next period’s economic factor and the transitory part of one component of next period’s cash flow. The extent to which each accrual provides this information depends on whether the accrual aligns future or past cash flows and current period economics and whether it relates to the current or prior period. Thus each type of accrual has a different coefficient in valuation and forecasting cash flows or earnings. Each coefficient combines an information weight reflecting the information that accrual type provides and a multiple reflecting how that information is used in valuation and cash flow and earnings forecasting. The empirical evidence supports our main insight, namely that partitioning accruals based on their role in cash-flow alignment increases their ability to forecast future cash flows and earnings and explain firm value.     

The irrelevance of the MM dividend irrelevance theorem

Contrary to Miller and Modigliani [1961. Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. Journal of Business 34, 411–433], payout policy is not irrelevant and investment policy is not the sole determinant of value, even in frictionless markets. MM ask “Do companies with generous distribution policies consistently sell at a premium above those with niggardly payouts?” But MM's analysis does not address this question because the joint effect of their assumptions is to mandate 100% free cash flow payout in every period, thereby rendering “niggardly payouts” infeasible and forcing distributions to a global optimum. Irrelevance obtains, but in an economically vacuous sense because the firm's opportunity set is artificially constrained to payout policies that fully distribute free cash flow. When MM's assumptions are relaxed to allow retention, payout policy matters in exactly the same sense that investment policy does. Moreover (i) the standard Fisherian model is empirically refutable, predicting that firms will make large payouts in present value terms, (ii) only when payout policy is optimized will the present value of distributions equal the PV of project cash flows, (iii) the NPV rule for investments is not sufficient to ensure value maximization, rather an analogous rule for payout policy is also necessary, and (iv) Black's [1976. The dividend puzzle. Journal of Portfolio Management 2, 5–8] “dividend puzzle” is a non-puzzle because it is rooted in the mistaken idea that MM's irrelevance theorem applies to payout/retention decisions, which it does not.     

Two Different Ways of Treating Corporate Cash in FCF Valuations—and the Importance of Getting the Cost of Capital Right

The methods for calculating free cash flow presented in texts on financial statement analysis and valuation appear to be very different from those in corporate finance texts, causing some confusion among academics as well as practitioners. Financial statement analysis and valuation texts generally begin by valuing just the enterprise operations—that is, the entity that engages in the firm's primary revenue‐generating activities—and then adding back the value of its cash holdings and other financial assets. The corporate finance approach is typically to value all the assets together, including financial assets that are not used in the production of the goods and services provided by the firm. Using a simple example, the authors show that the valuation of the equity ownership of the firm should be the same for both methods of calculating free cash flow, provided the analyst makes the appropriate adjustments to the method for calculating the cost of capital (WACC) used to discount forecasted free cash flows to a present value.     

A sequential pricing framework for corporate securities: The case of rating-trigger step-up/-down bonds

We develop a sequential pricing framework in a continuous time cash flow model allowing for repeated valuation of different cash flow claims. One claim is valued until a prespecified boundary is hit, which is subsequently used as the new valuation starting point for the next claim. This highly flexible pricing framework is applied to the pricing of rating-trigger step-up/-down corporate bonds, the coupon payments of which depend on the issuing company’s credit rating. We present a simple closed-form pricing solution for this type of bonds including both a step-up and step-down threshold, as well as a lower default boundary.