2012
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2187080
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Analysts' Preferences Affect Corporate Policies?

Abstract: Equity research analysts tend to cover firms about which they have favorable views. We exploit this fact to infer analysts' preferences for corporate policies from their coverage decisions. We then use exogenous analyst disappearances to examine the effect of preferences on policies. After an analyst disappears, firms change their policies in the direction opposite to his preferences. Our results suggest that firms choose their corporate policies, in part, to be consistent with the preferences of their analyst… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(11 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among the investments, acquisition expenditures decrease by about 1 percent of the firm's total assets. These are not, however, the only effects related to financial analysts’ coverage: Degeorge, Derrien, Kecskés, and Michenaud () find that firms cater to the preferences of sell‐side analysts when they choose their investment policies to obtain more favorable treatment. Sell‐side financial analysts also impact the premium paid for target firms.…”
Section: Takeover Market and Pressure From Financial Market Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the investments, acquisition expenditures decrease by about 1 percent of the firm's total assets. These are not, however, the only effects related to financial analysts’ coverage: Degeorge, Derrien, Kecskés, and Michenaud () find that firms cater to the preferences of sell‐side analysts when they choose their investment policies to obtain more favorable treatment. Sell‐side financial analysts also impact the premium paid for target firms.…”
Section: Takeover Market and Pressure From Financial Market Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, it is most likely that the treatment assignments are not random. Similar to other natural experimental settings, like, for example, brokerage house mergers or closures exploited by recent studies on sell-side equity analysts (Irani and Oesch, 2013;Chen et al, 2013;Degeorge et al, 2013b), it is plausible to assume that the treatment assignments are to some extent size related. In the current research design as outlined below, I mitigate a potential size effect by using two different control groups (a first control group with smaller firms and a second control group with larger firms), treatment and firm-fixed effects, as well as size related firm control variables within the DiD regressions.…”
Section: Do Corporate Governance Analysts Matter? Evidence From a Qua...mentioning
confidence: 99%