分析师的毛利率预测是否会影响经理确认库存损失的决策?

IF 2.2 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Business Finance & Accounting Pub Date : 2024-08-23 DOI:10.1111/jbfa.12828
Nusrat Jahan, Padmakumar Sivadasan
{"title":"分析师的毛利率预测是否会影响经理确认库存损失的决策?","authors":"Nusrat Jahan, Padmakumar Sivadasan","doi":"10.1111/jbfa.12828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accounting standards require firms to write down their inventory when its market value (or net realizable value) drops below cost. Recognizing inventory write‐downs decreases gross margins and increases scrutiny of managers’ inventory management practices. Further, it is difficult for market participants to assess inventory balances. Therefore, managers often delay recognizing inventory losses. Compared with other analysts, analysts who issue disaggregated gross margin (GM) forecasts evaluate a firm's inventories more closely, which should motivate managers to recognize expected inventory losses. Consistent with this prediction, managers’ likelihood of recognizing an expected inventory loss increases as more analysts provide GM forecasts. However, the number of analysts issuing standalone earnings per share (EPS) or EPS and other disaggregated forecasts is not associated with inventory loss recognition. We address endogeneity concerns by documenting that firms are less likely to recognize an expected inventory loss after exogenous factors cause analysts to stop issuing GM forecasts for the firm. We contribute significantly to the literature by showing that analysts' GM forecasts are closely associated with managers’ timely inventory loss recognition. This insight bridges the gap between anecdotal evidence, which suggests analysts assess inventory carefully, and scholarly research indicating that analysts' forecasts may not fully capture the effects of inventory changes. Our findings suggest that managers act as if inventory management practices are more strictly monitored only when analysts issue GM forecasts.","PeriodicalId":48106,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do analysts’ gross margin forecasts influence manager's decisions to recognize inventory losses?\",\"authors\":\"Nusrat Jahan, Padmakumar Sivadasan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbfa.12828\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Accounting standards require firms to write down their inventory when its market value (or net realizable value) drops below cost. Recognizing inventory write‐downs decreases gross margins and increases scrutiny of managers’ inventory management practices. Further, it is difficult for market participants to assess inventory balances. Therefore, managers often delay recognizing inventory losses. Compared with other analysts, analysts who issue disaggregated gross margin (GM) forecasts evaluate a firm's inventories more closely, which should motivate managers to recognize expected inventory losses. Consistent with this prediction, managers’ likelihood of recognizing an expected inventory loss increases as more analysts provide GM forecasts. However, the number of analysts issuing standalone earnings per share (EPS) or EPS and other disaggregated forecasts is not associated with inventory loss recognition. We address endogeneity concerns by documenting that firms are less likely to recognize an expected inventory loss after exogenous factors cause analysts to stop issuing GM forecasts for the firm. We contribute significantly to the literature by showing that analysts' GM forecasts are closely associated with managers’ timely inventory loss recognition. This insight bridges the gap between anecdotal evidence, which suggests analysts assess inventory carefully, and scholarly research indicating that analysts' forecasts may not fully capture the effects of inventory changes. Our findings suggest that managers act as if inventory management practices are more strictly monitored only when analysts issue GM forecasts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12828\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12828","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

会计准则要求企业在存货的市场价值(或可变现净值)低于成本时进行减记。确认库存减记会降低毛利率,并增加对管理者库存管理做法的审查。此外,市场参与者很难评估存货余额。因此,管理者通常会推迟确认存货损失。与其他分析师相比,发布分类毛利率(GM)预测的分析师会更仔细地评估公司的存货,这应该会促使管理者确认预期的存货损失。与这一预测相一致的是,随着越来越多的分析师提供 GM 预测,管理者确认预期存货损失的可能性也会增加。然而,发布独立每股收益(EPS)或每股收益及其他分类预测的分析师数量与存货损失确认无关。我们通过证明在外生性因素导致分析师停止发布公司的通用预测后,公司不太可能确认预期存货损失,从而解决了内生性问题。通过证明分析师的 GM 预测与管理者及时确认存货损失密切相关,我们为相关文献做出了重要贡献。这一见解弥补了传闻证据与学术研究之间的差距,传闻证据表明分析师会仔细评估库存,而学术研究则表明分析师的预测可能无法完全捕捉到库存变化的影响。我们的研究结果表明,只有当分析师发布全球机制预测时,经理们才会认为库存管理实践受到了更严格的监控。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Do analysts’ gross margin forecasts influence manager's decisions to recognize inventory losses?
Accounting standards require firms to write down their inventory when its market value (or net realizable value) drops below cost. Recognizing inventory write‐downs decreases gross margins and increases scrutiny of managers’ inventory management practices. Further, it is difficult for market participants to assess inventory balances. Therefore, managers often delay recognizing inventory losses. Compared with other analysts, analysts who issue disaggregated gross margin (GM) forecasts evaluate a firm's inventories more closely, which should motivate managers to recognize expected inventory losses. Consistent with this prediction, managers’ likelihood of recognizing an expected inventory loss increases as more analysts provide GM forecasts. However, the number of analysts issuing standalone earnings per share (EPS) or EPS and other disaggregated forecasts is not associated with inventory loss recognition. We address endogeneity concerns by documenting that firms are less likely to recognize an expected inventory loss after exogenous factors cause analysts to stop issuing GM forecasts for the firm. We contribute significantly to the literature by showing that analysts' GM forecasts are closely associated with managers’ timely inventory loss recognition. This insight bridges the gap between anecdotal evidence, which suggests analysts assess inventory carefully, and scholarly research indicating that analysts' forecasts may not fully capture the effects of inventory changes. Our findings suggest that managers act as if inventory management practices are more strictly monitored only when analysts issue GM forecasts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
17.20%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Journal of Business Finance and Accounting exists to publish high quality research papers in accounting, corporate finance, corporate governance and their interfaces. The interfaces are relevant in many areas such as financial reporting and communication, valuation, financial performance measurement and managerial reward and control structures. A feature of JBFA is that it recognises that informational problems are pervasive in financial markets and business organisations, and that accounting plays an important role in resolving such problems. JBFA welcomes both theoretical and empirical contributions. Nonetheless, theoretical papers should yield novel testable implications, and empirical papers should be theoretically well-motivated. The Editors view accounting and finance as being closely related to economics and, as a consequence, papers submitted will often have theoretical motivations that are grounded in economics. JBFA, however, also seeks papers that complement economics-based theorising with theoretical developments originating in other social science disciplines or traditions. While many papers in JBFA use econometric or related empirical methods, the Editors also welcome contributions that use other empirical research methods. Although the scope of JBFA is broad, it is not a suitable outlet for highly abstract mathematical papers, or empirical papers with inadequate theoretical motivation. Also, papers that study asset pricing, or the operations of financial markets, should have direct implications for one or more of preparers, regulators, users of financial statements, and corporate financial decision makers, or at least should have implications for the development of future research relevant to such users.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Out‐of‐sample predictability of firm‐specific stock price crashes: A machine learning approach Verifiable content in social media stock‐analysis articles: The long and short of it Top management team incentive dispersion and management earnings forecasts Coarse performance evaluation for envious agents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1