The effect of agency costs on the value of single-segment and multi-segment firms

This paper investigates the effectiveness of equity-based compensation in mitigating the effects of agency costs on the valuation of single-segment and multi-segment firms. In a sample of 4182 firm-year observations during the period 1993–1998, we find that firms with high equity-based compensation have higher valuation than firms with low equity-based compensation. This is true in both single-segment and multi-segment firms. The effect of equity-based compensation for multi-segment firms, where agency costs are expected to be higher, is much greater than for single-segment firms. Also, the negative value-effect of diversification is less for firms with high equity-based compensation.     

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.     

Can growth opportunities explain the diversification discount?

We investigate the possibility that the diversification discount is due to differing growth opportunities between diversified and single-segment firms. We do this by comparing diversified business segments with individual single-segment same-industry firms of comparable growth opportunities. Using a sample of 230 diversifying firms from 1981 to 1997, we find a significant valuation discount in diversified firms even when we control for the difference in growth opportunities between diversified and single-segment firms. This result suggests that differing growth opportunities between diversified and single-segment firms cannot account for the diversification discount.     

Has European corporatism delivered? A survey with preliminary evidence

I ask whether European firms' investments in stakeholder welfare come at the cost of lower shareholder value. Focusing on the largest 50 public firms in four European countries, I find a valuation discount in the Tobin's Q of continental European firms relative to matched US firms. The valuation discount is correlated with presence of large block holders in European firms but not with the poorer disclosure record of US firms on the environmental (E) and social (S) dimensions. In sum, poorer governance (G) in continental Europe appears to destroy more shareholder value than better E and S disclosure can add.     

Valuation differences between quoted and unquoted companies- empirical evidence from the UK

This paper focuses upon differences in the valuation of UK quoted and unquoted companies. It draws on empirical evidence over the period from 1991 to 1997. It commences with an overview of the published literature. This suggests a broad spectrum of valuation statistics ranging from very minor discounts for non-listed companies relative to their quoted brethren, up to a discount as high as 40%. The empirical analysis uses PE ratios, derived from the publication Acquisitions Monthly, in respect of non-listed, private companies selling out in takeover deals. These are compared with average PE ratios for quoted companies in Britain. A raw statistic of approximately 40% was found as the discount for non-listed firms relative to quoted companies. However, this is dramatically different when corrected for size. For size varying from less than GBP 0.5 million to about GBP 55 million, the discount ranges, respectively, from 16% to 6% with an average of around 10%. Regression equations relating size and PE ratio are presented.     

The impact of geographic diversification on firm performance

This paper empirically examines the economic effects of both corporate industrial and geographic diversifications. Using a sample of 28,050 firm-year observations from 1990 to 1998, we find that industrial and geographic diversifications are associated with firm value decrease. Consistent with Denis et al. [Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., and Yost, K. (2002). Global diversification, industrial diversification, and firm value. Journal of Finance, 57, 1951-1979], the costs of corporate diversification may outweigh the benefits of diversification. We find that geographically diversified firms have higher R&D expenditures, advertising expenses, operating income, ROE and ROA than industrially diversified firms. In addition, higher R&D expenditures create value for multi-segment global firms, but not for single-segment global firms. This result implies that there exists an interaction effect between industrial and geographic diversification. We also examine the effects of agency cost issues, as characterized by the diversification discount, on both industrial and geographic diversification. Consistent with the agency explanation, firms with high equity-based compensation are associated with higher firm value than firms with low equity-based compensation. Also, we find that firms with a higher insider ownership percentage are associated with higher excess value.     

Searching for value relevance of book value and earnings: a case of premium versus discount firms

We examine the premium/discount firm characteristic that fundamentally affects the value relevance of two key accounting line items, earnings and book values. We argue that from the perspective of both the residual income and option-style valuation models, the relative valuation roles of earnings and book values differ fundamentally between firms that trade at a premium vis-à-vis discount to book value. We find that book values play a significantly more important role in equity valuation than earnings when firms trade at a discount. We also find that other known influential conditions, such as the sign of earnings (Collins et al. in Acc Rev 74(1):29–61, 1999) or the relative levels of earnings and book value (Burgstahler and Dichev in Acc Rev 72(2):187–215, 1997), become inconsequential when the premium/discount condition of the firm is controlled for. The discovered relationships between the relative valuation roles of book values and earnings and the discount/premium characteristics of the firm are robust to the effect of time, information environment and the industry of the firm.     

Value relevance of customer-related intangible assets

This study examines the stock market's valuation of customer-related intangible assets for a sample of publicly-traded U.S. firms. Customer-related intangible assets are found to be positively associated with equity prices, but valued at a discount relative to goodwill. These results suggest that value-relevant information is lost if customer-related intangible assets are subsumed into goodwill rather than being reported separately. This evidence can be useful to standard setters potentially considering extending to public companies a recent FASB Accounting Standards Update allowing private companies not to recognize separately from goodwill certain customer-related intangible assets.     

Does geographic dispersion affect firm valuation?

We find that the geographic dispersion of a corporation affects its firm valuation. Firms with subsidiaries located in different regions of the United States experience a valuation discount of 6.2% after controlling for the impact of both global and industrial diversifications. The valuation discount increases as firms expand their operations to different regions nationwide. Results show that firms with more anti-takeover provisions are more likely to be geographically diverse, and that these firms experience greater value discounts compared with their counterparts with fewer such provisions. Our overall evidence suggests that the geographic location of corporate activities is an essential component of corporate policies and has important market valuation implications.     

A Model of International Asset Pricing with a Constraint on the Foreign Equity Ownership

This paper derives a closed-form valuation model in a two-country world in which the domestic investors are constrained to own at most a fraction, δ, of the number of shares outstanding of the foreign firms. When the “δ constraint” is binding, two different prices rule in the foreign securities market, reflecting the premium offered by the domestic investors over the price under no constraints and the discount demanded by the foreign investors. The premium is shown to be a multiple of the discount, the multiple being the ratio of the aggregate risk aversion of the domestic and foreign investors. Given the aggregate risk-aversion parameters, the equilibrium premium and discount are determined by the severity of the δ constraint and the “pure” foreign market risk.     

Accounting‐based Risk Management and the Capital Asset Pricing Model: An Empirical Comparison

Accounting‐based risk management (ABRM) is a theoretically consistent and practical tool for calculating the cost of capital from underlying financial ratios. In this paper, a sample of ABRM‐generated discount factors is used to generate risk‐adjusted returns, which are compared to CAPM equivalent discount factors. In view of the debates about CAPM's validity, alternative models, the nature and scale of the equity risk premium, and the importance of discount rates in capital budgeting and asset valuation, ABRM's characteristics and resulting discount rates offer a potentially useful alternative. Results suggest that although average discount rates are comparable, their cross‐sectional distributions are dissimilar, so that investors in an average risky firm are overcompensated for systematic risk when using CAPM discount rates, because CAPM discount factors overestimate risk arising from fixed costs in most firms.     

An analysis of private versus public firm valuations and the contribution of financial experts

This study investigates differences in expert valuations of private versus public firms conducted for transactions outside the exchange. First, we provide evidence for extreme reliance of the experts on private firms' reported earnings, despite a possible manipulation of these earnings. In contrast, experts valuing public firms seem to rely on other, non-financial statement information sources, even if the quality of pre-acquisition earnings is higher in these firms. Second, we present evidence that the contribution of experts to investors in private firms is questionable at best. Our findings indicate that a private firm valuation performed by a potential investor based on available information provides results similar to those of the expert. Third, we show that inconclusive results regarding the existence of a discount in private firm valuations may be explained by experts' compliance with the interests of the commissioner of the valuation. This finding provides at least a partial explanation for the private company discount, one that adds to prior standard explanations (e.g., liquidity) offered in the finance literature.     

An Empirical Examination of the Pricing of Seasoned Equity Offerings: A Test of the Signaling Hypothesis

This paper tests the predictions made by Signaling Theory against the competing Price–Irrelevance Hypothesis (Eckbo and Masulis, 1992). Signaling Theory suggests that the issue price of a security provides a signal of quality of the issuing firm. In contrast, the Price–Irrelevance Hypothesis suggests that equity pricing does not possess information content. This paper investigates the pricing of seasoned equity offerings by examining the role of firm quality and relative firm valuation on issue price discounts. Additionally, this paper investigates the relationship between the issue price discount and the market reaction at the issuance of seasoned equity offerings. The results indicate that firm quality does not have a significant impact on the degree of price discounting by the issuing firm. Relative firm market valuation does appear to be a determinant of the magnitude of discounting in setting the issue price. This paper also provides evidence that seasoned equity offerings firms that provide a lower issue-price discount experience a lower stock-price decline following the issuance as compared to firms offering a higher price discount.     

Valuation-driven profit transfer among corporate segments

This paper investigates whether the desire to achieve higher equity valuations induces conglomerates to manipulate their segment earnings. I extend the Stein (Q J Econ 104:655–669, 1989) model to a multi-segment setting and show that conglomerates have incentives to transfer profits from segments operating in industries with lower valuation multiples to those with higher multiples, even if the market is not fooled in equilibrium. If companies engage in such manipulation, segments with relatively high (low) valuations should report abnormally high (low) profits. The empirical tests confirm this prediction and further show that the relation is stronger for firms with more dispersed segment valuations. This paper also demonstrates that the simple sum-of-the-parts valuation with multiples tends to overestimate the enterprise values for conglomerates and that the measurement errors increase with segment valuation dispersion.     

International Evidence on the Value of Corporate Diversification

The valuation effect of diversification is examined for large samples of firms in Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom for 1992 and 1994. We find no significant diversification discount in Germany, but a significant diversification discount of 10 percent in Japan and 15 percent in the U.K. Concentrated ownership in the hands of insiders enhances the valuation effect of diversification in Germany, but not in Japan or the U.K. For Japan, only firms with strong links to an industrial group have a diversification discount. These findings suggest that international differences in corporate governance affect the impact of diversification on shareholder wealth.     

The Economics of Director Heterogeneity

We investigate the potential costs and benefits of firms constituting a heterogeneous pool of directors relative to more homogeneous boards. We measure director heterogeneity along six separate dimensions and divide board heterogeneity into occupational and social components. Our empirical analysis indicates that corporate complexity and managerial control exhibit significant influence on board heterogeneity. Using the heterogeneity of the county population of the firm's headquarters as an instrument, we also find that investors place valuation premiums on heterogeneous boards in complex firms but discount heterogeneity in less complex firms. Overall, our analysis indicates greater heterogeneity may not necessarily improve board efficacy.     

The consequences of deviating from financial reporting industry norms: Evidence from the disclosure of foreign cash

This study examines how investors respond to firms’ disclosure practices that deviate from the majority of industry peers (i.e., industry norms). The SEC has made repeated calls for the disclosure of foreign cash in order for investors to have more information in determining firms’ liquidity positions. We examine the association between firm value and the non-disclosure of foreign cash in industries where the majority of firms choose to disclose foreign cash. We define partial disclosure as disclosing permanently reinvested earnings (PRE), but withholding the disclosure of foreign cash, and find that when the majority of industry peers disclose foreign cash, investors discount the firm-specific partial disclosure of foreign operations. This finding suggests that investors have similar information demands as the SEC, and that withholding foreign cash results in a valuation discount. We also find that this discount is more pronounced for firms predicted to have higher levels of foreign cash and higher levels of PRE. The discount in firm value is also concentrated among firms with managers who have more career concerns, suggesting that managers shift the cost of partial disclosure to shareholders instead of bearing the personal reputational cost of full disclosure. Our results are robust to multiple matched samples and entropy balancing. While previous literature has considered the valuation implications of foreign cash disclosures, we reveal the consequences of opting to withhold the disclosure of foreign cash. Our findings should be of interest to both managers and policy-setters in forming their disclosure protocols.     

The Cost of Carbon: Capital Market Effects of the Proposed Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)

In March 2008, the Australian Government announced its intention to introduce a national Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), now expected to start in 2015. This impending development provides an ideal setting to investigate the impact an ETS in Australia will have on the market valuation of Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) firms. This is the first empirical study into the pricing effects of the ETS in Australia. Primarily, we hypothesize that firm value will be negatively related to a firm's carbon intensity profile. That is, there will be a greater impact on firm value for high carbon emitters in the period prior (2007) to the introduction of the ETS, whether for reasons relating to the existence of unbooked liabilities associated with future compliance and/or abatement costs, or for reasons relating to reduced future earnings. Using a sample of 58 Australian listed firms (constrained by the current availability of emissions data) which comprise larger, more profitable and less risky listed Australian firms, we first undertake an event study focusing on five distinct information events argued to impact the probability of the proposed ETS being enacted. Here, we find direct evidence that the capital market is indeed pricing the proposed ETS. Second, using a modified version of the Ohlson ( 1995 ) valuation model, we undertake a valuation analysis designed not only to complement the event study results, but more importantly to provide insights into the capital market's assessment of the magnitude of the economic impact of the proposed ETS as reflected in market capitalization. Here, our results show that the market assesses the most carbon intensive sample firms a market value decrement relative to other sample firms of between 7% and 10% of market capitalization. Further, based on the carbon emission profile of the sample firms we imply a ‘future carbon permit price’ of between AUD$17 per tonne and AUD$26 per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted. This study is more precise than industry reports, which set a carbon price of between AUD$15 to AUD$74 per tonne.     

Spin‐offs: Tackling the Conglomerate Discount

Spin‐offs and other restructuring actions have risen sharply in 2011, driven by the need to streamline business models and increase corporate values. These transactions can be an effective tool for addressing the conglomerate valuation discount that has been a pervasive phenomenon over the past decade, affecting conglomerates in most regions across the world. In particular, North American and Western European conglomerates trade at valuation multiples that are roughly 10% lower than those of their pure‐play peers. A conglomerate discount also prevails in some of the emerging markets, including CEEMEA and Asia. Nevertheless, in some regions, notably Japan and Latin America, conglomerates typically trade at a premium. Although the average conglomerate discount narrowed during the financial crisis due to the perceived benefits of diversification during downturns, almost half of the conglomerates globally trade at a discount, and almost a third of all conglomerates have persistently traded at a discount during the past five years. For such companies, fixing the discount requires a simplification of the business model. The authors show that recent announcements of spin‐offs have led to significant share price outperformance by the parent company in both the short and the longterm, highlighting their effectiveness as a tool to enhance valuation. Spin‐offs can be particularly attractive for those conglomerates that operate unrelated business segments since these firms trade at a sharper discount than diversified firms operating in related businesses. The authors discuss how management should think about the financial implications of spin‐offs, including capital structure considerations, dividend policy, and turnover in the shareholder base.     

Investability and Firm Value

We study how investability, or openness to foreign equity investors, affects firm value in a sample of over 1,400 firms from 26 emerging markets. We find that, on average, investability is associated with a 9% valuation premium (as measured by Tobin's q). This significant valuation premium persists in firm‐fixed effects regressions, although the magnitude and robustness of the premium is somewhat lower. Analysis of the components of Tobin's q shows that firms that become investable experience significant increases in both market values and physical investment. These effects are strongest for firms that face country‐level or firm‐level financial constraints prior to becoming investable.