Advertisement

Design of the empirical study

Abstract

The conceptual framework, as developed in the preceding chapter, builds on the implications of finance and accounting theory and related empirical research. In order to undermine the comprehensiveness and to evaluate the practicability of the framework — in particular for European equity markets — I carry out an exclusive empirical study. The following section introduces the concept of value relevance, the cornerstone of the study. It also forms a link to market efficiency and explains the assumptions of the study. Next, I formulate hypotheses for research questions 4 to 10 and clarify the underlying methodology of the study. The presentation of the initial dataset and the discussion of descriptive statistics of the ultimate sample make up the final section in this chapter.

Keywords

Market Participant Equity Market Market Efficiency Earning Announcement Accounting Information 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

o

  1. Fama, E.F., 1991. Efficient Capital Markets: II. Journal of Finance 46, 1575–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fama, E.F., 1998. Market efficiency, long-term returns, and behavioral finance. Journal of Financial Economics 49, 283–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Kothari, S.P., 2001. Capital markets research in accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics 31, 105–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Copeland, T., Weston, J.F., Shastri, K., 2004. Financial Theory and Corporate Policy, 4th edition. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA. chapter 11.Google Scholar
  5. Alford, A.W., 1992. The Effect of the Set of Comparable Firms on the Accuracy of the Price-Earnings Valuation Method. Journal of Accounting Research 30, 94–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Liu, J., Nissim, D., Thomas, J.K., 2002a. Equity Valuation Using Multiples. Journal of Accounting Research 40, 135–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Herrmann, V., Richter, F., 2003. Pricing with Performance-Controlled Multiples. Schmalenbach Business Review 55, 194–219.Google Scholar
  8. Kaplan, S.N., Ruback, R.S., 1995. The Valuation of Cash Flow Forecasts: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Finance 50, 1059–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaplan, S.N., Ruback, R.S., 1996. The Market Pricing of Cash Flow Forecasts: Discounted Cash Flow vs. the Method of Comparables. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 8, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim, M., Ritter, J.R., 1999. Valuing IPOs. Journal of Financial Economics 53, 409–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilson, S.C., Hotchkiss, E.S., Ruback, R.S., 2000. Valuation of bankrupt firms. Review of Financial Studies 13, 43–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lie, E., Lie, H.J., 2002. Multiples Used to Estimate Corporate Value. Financial Analysts Journal 58, 44–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu, J., Nissim, D., Thomas, J.K., 2005a. Cash flow is King? Comparing valuations based on cash flow versus earnings multiples. Working paper, UCLA, Columbia University, Yale University.Google Scholar
  14. Herrmann, V., Richter, F., 2003. Pricing with Performance-Controlled Multiples. Schmalenbach Business Review 55, 194–219.Google Scholar
  15. Von Berenberg-Consbruch, J., 2006. Industriespezifische Multiples in der Unternehmensbewertung: eine empirische Untersuchung für den europäischen Aktienmarkt. Master thesis, University of St.Gallen.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2007

Personalised recommendations