Value-Relevance of Good-News Versus Bad-News Management Earnings Forecasts

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee J. Cohen ◽  
Alan J. Marcus ◽  
Zabihollah Rezaee ◽  
Hassan Tehranian

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 79-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Jeremy Cohen ◽  
Alan J. Marcus ◽  
Zabihollah Rezaee ◽  
Hassan Tehranian




2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 157-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyonghee Kim ◽  
Shailendra (Shail) Pandit ◽  
Charles E. Wasley

SYNOPSIS To provide evidence on the role macroeconomic uncertainty plays in managers' decision to issue management earnings forecasts (MFs), this study develops and tests hypotheses about how such uncertainty affects the issuance and characteristics of MFs. Macroeconomic uncertainty is measured using the dispersion in GDP forecasts and the CBOE's Volatility Index (VIX). We find that during periods of high macroeconomic uncertainty there is a decrease in the likelihood of MF issuance, consistent with managers assigning a higher cost to releasing forward-looking information as macroeconomic uncertainty increases. We also find that managers issue fewer good and bad news MFs, but more neutral MFs, during periods of high macroeconomic uncertainty. Macroeconomic uncertainty also affects the characteristics of the MFs that managers do issue; for example, managers shift to more earnings preannouncements and to shorter-horizon, but more precise, MFs. Further analysis indicates that the regulatory changes imbedded in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act increased the costs of providing MFs, thereby increasing the sensitivity of MF issuance to macroeconomic uncertainty. The findings provide insight into the role macroeconomic uncertainty plays in managers' decision to issue MFs and the characteristics of the MFs they choose to issue.





2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-544
Author(s):  
Anthony Chen ◽  
Hung-Yuan (Richard) Lu

PurposeIn this study, the authors extend upon Brockman et al. (2008), who provide evidence that managers opportunistically accelerate bad news prior to share repurchases, but provide limited evidence that managers withhold good news until after repurchases. The authors examine management forecasts surrounding share repurchases in periods when companies must disclose detailed repurchase information. The authors argue these disclosures increase managers' legal and reputation risks of accelerating bad news, but have a lesser effect on delaying good news.Design/methodology/approachFirst, the authors examine whether managers alter the information released to the market before buying back shares by comparing managerial forecasts made within 30 days before the beginning of a repurchasing period with those made outside of this window. Second, the authors examine whether managers are more likely to provide good news forecasts, in terms of both magnitude and frequency, after buying back shares. Lastly, the authors examine the impact of CEO stock ownership on managerial forecasting behavior surrounding share buybacks.FindingsConsistent with the authors’ hypotheses and contrary to Brockman et al. (2008), the authors find limited evidence that the likelihood or magnitude of bad news forecasts is greater in the period before share buybacks. Instead, the authors document that the frequency and magnitude of good news forecasts increase in periods following share buybacks and that these associations are positively moderated by managerial equity incentives. The authors also find that the withholding of good news is associated with lower average repurchase prices and greater repurchase volume. The authors further show that, when litigation risk is greater, managers are less likely to accelerate bad news prior to repurchases and more likely to withhold good news until after. Overall, the study results are consistent with managers balancing the benefits of opportunistic repurchase behavior with the costs.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the management forecast and share repurchase literatures by providing evidence consistent with managers opportunistically releasing earnings forecasts in the period after buying back shares. Most importantly, the authors show that after the rule revision, managers refrain from actively disclosing bad news that carry higher legal costs. Instead, they opt for the omission of good news to repurchase stocks at lower prices. The study results reconcile the conflicting evidence of Brockman et al. (2008) and Ge and Lennox (2011).



Author(s):  
Amy Hutton ◽  
Phillip C Stocken

We examine the properties of firms’ forecasting records and whether the accuracy of their prior earnings forecasts affects investor response to their subsequent forecasts. Within the context of a Bayesian model of investor learning, we find that the stock price response to management forecast news is increasing in prior forecast accuracy and also in the length of a firm’s forecasting record. Further, we document that investors are more responsive to extreme good and bad news forecasts when a firm has an established forecasting record. Overall, these results suggest that a firm’s prior forecasting behavior allows it to establish a forecasting reputation, and that market forces encourage accurate forecasting as firms benefit from having a reputation for forecasting accurately.





2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 58
Author(s):  
MARY ANN MOON




Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document