@article{5113,
  abstract     = {{Standard equity valuation approaches (i.e., DDM, RIM, and DCF model) are derived under the assumption of ideal conditions, such as infinite payoffs and clean surplus accounting. Because these conditions are hardly ever met, we extend the standard approaches, based on the fundamental principle of financial statement articulation. The extended models are then tested empirically by employing two sets of forecasts: (1) analyst forecasts provided by Value Line and (2) forecasts generated by cross-sectional regression models. The main result is that our extended models yield considerably smaller valuation errors. Moreover, by construction, identical value estimates are obtained across the extended models. By reestablishing empirical equivalence under non-ideal conditions, our approach provides a benchmark that enables us to quantify the errors resulting from individual deviations from ideal conditions, and thus, to analyze the robustness of the standard approaches. Finally, by providing a level playing field for the different valuation approaches, our findings have implications for other empirical settings, for example, estimating the implied cost of capital. }},
  author       = {{Heinrichs, Nicolas and Hess, Dieter and Homburg, Carsten and Lorenz, Michael and Sievers, Sönke}},
  journal      = {{Contemporary Accounting Research (VHB-JOURQUAL 3 Ranking A)}},
  keywords     = {{Dividend Discount Model, Residual Income, Discounted Cash Flow, Dirty Surplus, Terminal Value, Valuation Error}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{42--79}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley Online Library}},
  title        = {{{Extended dividend, cash flow, and residual income valuation models: Accounting for deviations from ideal conditions}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.1145201}},
  volume       = {{30}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@book{5172,
  author       = {{Sievers, Sönke}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-86582-925-2}},
  keywords     = {{Unternehmensbewertung, Unternehmenswachstum, Return on Investment Unternehmensbewertung, Investition, Steuervergünstigung}},
  publisher    = {{Verlag-Haus Monsenstein und Vannerdat}},
  title        = {{{Company Valuation and Growth: Theory, Empirical Evidence and Practical Implementation Issues}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{5191,
  abstract     = {{This study examines the relevance of financial and non-financial information for the valuation of venture capital (VC) investments. Based on a hand-collected data set on venture-backed start-ups in Germany, we investigate the internal due diligence documents of over 200 investment rounds. We document that balance sheet and income statement items capture as much economic content as verifiable non-financial information (e.g. team experience or the number of patents) while controlling for several deal characteristics (e.g. industry, investment round, or yearly VC fund inflows). In addition, we show that valuations based on accounting and non-accounting information yield a level of valuation accuracy that is comparable to that of publicly traded firms. Further analyses show that the industry-specific total asset multiples outperform the popular revenue multiples but lead to significantly less accurate results than those obtained from the more comprehensive valuation models. Overall, our findings might inform researchers and standard-setters of the usefulness of accounting information for investment companies and provide additional evidence to gauge the overall valuation accuracy in VC settings.}},
  author       = {{Sievers, Sönke and Mokwa, Christopher F and Keienburg, Georg}},
  journal      = {{European Accounting Review (VHB-JOURQUAL 3 Ranking A)}},
  keywords     = {{value relevance, equity valuation, venture capital, human capital, start-ups}},
  number       = {{3}},
  pages        = {{467--511}},
  publisher    = {{Taylor \& Francis}},
  title        = {{{The relevance of financial versus non-financial information for the valuation of venture capital-backed firms}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/09638180.2012.741051}},
  volume       = {{22}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{5192,
  abstract     = {{For the valuation of fast growing innovative firms Schwartz and Moon (Financ Anal J 56:62–75, 2000), (Financ Rev 36:7–26, 2001) develop a fundamental valuation model where key parameters follow stochastic processes. While prior research shows promising potential for this model, it has never been tested on a large scale dataset. Thus, guided by economic theory, this paper is the first to design a large-scale applicable implementation on around 30,000 technology firm quarter observations from 1992 to 2009 for the US to assess this model. Evaluating the feasibility and performance of the Schwartz-Moon model reveals that it is comparably accurate to the traditional sales multiple with key advantages in valuing small and non-listed firms. Most importantly, however, the model is able to indicate severe market over- or undervaluation from a fundamental perspective. We demonstrate that a trading strategy based on our implementation has significant investment value. Consequently, the model seems suitable for detecting misvaluations as the dot-com bubble.}},
  author       = {{Klobucnik, Jan and Sievers, Sönke}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Business Economics (VHB-JOURQUAL 3 Ranking B)}},
  keywords     = {{Schwartz-Moon model, Market mispricing, Empirical test, Company valuation, Trading strategy}},
  number       = {{9}},
  pages        = {{947--984}},
  publisher    = {{Springer}},
  title        = {{{Valuing high technology growth firms}}},
  doi          = {{https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-013-0684-2}},
  volume       = {{83}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@misc{5201,
  author       = {{Sievers, Sönke and Schlüter, Tobias and Hartmann-Wendels, Thomas}},
  booktitle    = {{Börsen-Zeitung}},
  title        = {{{Die erfolgreiche Bindung des Sparers an die Bank}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@misc{5202,
  author       = {{Sievers, Sönke and Hartmann-Wendels, Thomas and Busch, Ramona and Schlüter, Tobias}},
  booktitle    = {{Börsen-Zeitung}},
  pages        = {{6}},
  title        = {{{Wie Banken Kostenvorteile weitergeben}}},
  volume       = {{6}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@book{14982,
  author       = {{Sureth, Caren}},
  isbn         = {{9783824469741}},
  title        = {{{Der Einfluss von Steuern auf Investitionsentscheidungen bei Unsicherheit}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/978-3-663-08348-1}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{4398,
  abstract     = {{Employing a Hausman–Taylor instrument variable (HT–IV) estimator to data from 558 microfinance institutions (MFIs) in 80 developing countries for the period from 2002 to 2007, this paper provides empirical evidence for a positive impact of a country's external governance quality and outcome on local microbanks' economic success in terms of profitability and sustainability. Evidence as well suggests a negative relationship between external governance and the microbanks' social success measured by the depth of outreach. In this context, our analysis reveals that a country's political stability, governance effectiveness, regulatory quality and rule of law are significant key elements of external governance affecting the MFIs' functional performance. Moreover, results from sensitivity analyses indicate that the relationship between external governance quality and microfinance functional performance significantly depends on the microbanks' business concepts, their lending methodologies and sources of funding.}},
  author       = {{Uhde, André and Müller, Oliver}},
  issn         = {{1752-0487}},
  journal      = {{ International Journal of Monetary Economics and Finance }},
  keywords     = {{microfinance, external governance, economic success, social success, developing countries, profitability, sustainability, microbanks, outreach, political stability, governance effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, governance quality, lending methodologies, funding sources}},
  number       = {{2/3}},
  pages        = {{116--149}},
  title        = {{{External governance outcome and microfinance success}}},
  doi          = {{https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMEF.2013.056394}},
  volume       = {{6}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{4397,
  abstract     = {{Employing four event dates of the U.S. “Troubled Asset Relief Program” (TARP) this paper empirically investigates the impact of the first announcement of TARP (September 19, 2008), the announcement of revised TARP (October 14, 2008), respective capital infusions under TARP-CPP and capital repayments on changes in shareholder value and risk exposure of 125 supported U.S. banks as perceived by the capital market through share price reactions for an entire sample period from September 19, 2008 to June 16, 2010. Our analysis reveals a light and a dark side of TARP. While announcements as well as capital repayments may restore market confidence and financial stability, equity capital injections to banks are observed to be a severe impediment to an increase in bank shareholder value and financial soundness. }},
  author       = {{Farruggio, Christian and Michalak, Tobias C. and Uhde, André}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Banking and Finance}},
  keywords     = {{Financial crisis, TARP, Market efficiency, Event study}},
  number       = {{5}},
  pages        = {{2586--2604}},
  title        = {{{The light and dark side of TARP}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.02.020}},
  volume       = {{32}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{47907,
  author       = {{Reimsbach, Daniel}},
  issn         = {{0044-2372}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Business Economics}},
  keywords     = {{Economics and Econometrics, Business and International Management}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{479--515}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Science and Business Media LLC}},
  title        = {{{Pro forma earnings disclosure: the effects of non-GAAP earnings and earnings-before on investors’ information processing}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s11573-013-0688-y}},
  volume       = {{84}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{47911,
  abstract     = {{<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title><jats:p>This study examines how the disclosure of negative sustainability‐related incidents affects the investment‐related judgments of decision‐makers. Participants in a sequential 2 × 2 between‐subjects experiment first received a company's financial information before viewing additional sustainability information (by the company and by a non‐governmental organization (NGO); with and without negative disclosure). Results indicate that self‐reporting of negative incidents does not affect decision‐makers’ stock price estimates and investment decisions compared with judgments based on financial information only. However, third‐party disclosure of these incidents by a NGO has a negative affect on these investment‐related judgments. Furthermore, the magnitude of the NGO reporting effect depends on whether the company itself simultaneously reports these incidents. Thus, disclosing negative incidents in sustainability reporting could lose some of its apparent stigma. Instead of avoiding negative reporting altogether, managers might use it as a risk mitigation tool in their reporting strategy. The results also emphasize the power of the often‐mentioned ‘watchdog’ function of NGOs acting as stakeholder advocates. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment</jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Reimsbach, Daniel and Hahn, Rüdiger}},
  issn         = {{0964-4733}},
  journal      = {{Business Strategy and the Environment}},
  keywords     = {{Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Strategy and Management, Geography, Planning and Development, Business and International Management}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{217--235}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{The Effects of Negative Incidents in Sustainability Reporting on Investors’ Judgments–an Experimental Study of Third‐party Versus Self‐disclosure in the Realm of Sustainable Development}}},
  doi          = {{10.1002/bse.1816}},
  volume       = {{24}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inbook{50361,
  author       = {{Koch, Christian}},
  booktitle    = {{Industrielles Controlling - Planung, Steuerung und Kontrolle von Beschaffung, Produktion und Logistik}},
  editor       = {{Betz, Stefan}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-8300-7413-7}},
  pages        = {{179--207}},
  publisher    = {{Dr. Kovac}},
  title        = {{{Einsatz der Risikoanalyse als Instrument des Investitionscontrollings}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inbook{50369,
  author       = {{Puls, Christoph}},
  booktitle    = {{Industrielles Controlling - Planung, Steuerung und Kontrolle von Beschaffung, Produktion und Logistik}},
  editor       = {{Betz, Stefan}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-8300-7413-7}},
  pages        = {{13--42}},
  publisher    = {{Dr. Kovac}},
  title        = {{{Kostenorientiertes Management von Logistikdienstleistern}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inbook{50389,
  author       = {{Opitz, Oliver}},
  booktitle    = {{Industrielles Controlling - Planung, Steuerung und Kontrolle von Beschaffung, Produktion und Logistik}},
  editor       = {{Betz, Stefan}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-8300-7413-7}},
  pages        = {{277--318}},
  publisher    = {{Dr. Kovac}},
  title        = {{{Integrierte, ökologieorientierte Produktlebenszyklusrechnung}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inbook{50400,
  author       = {{Faupel, Christian}},
  booktitle    = {{Industrielles Controlling - Planung, Steuerung und Kontrolle von Beschaffung, Produktion und Logistik}},
  editor       = {{Betz, Stefan}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-8300-7413-7}},
  pages        = {{277--318}},
  publisher    = {{Dr. Kovac}},
  title        = {{{Integrierte, ökologieorientierte Produktlebenszyklusrechnung}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inproceedings{37109,
  abstract     = {{This study examines the effect of audit on private firms’ cost of debt. We use a sample of 1,949 small private firms operating in the period 2006-2010 with optional financial statement audit. High quality data allows us to construct a more precise interest rate measure than existing studies employ. After controlling for obvious sources of demand for voluntary audits (ownership complexity, subsidiary status, bank relations), we find a robust central result that voluntary audits increase rather than decrease the cost of debt financing, contrary to several existing studies. This finding indicates that voluntary audits are generally treated as “adopting a label” and penalised by creditors, regardless of the perceived auditor quality as a result of the lemon problem in the audit market. Even Big-4 audits increase the cost of debt, likely as a result due to the lemon problem in the audit market, although the increase is smaller than for non-Big-4 audits. The results are sensitive to the estimation method used (OLS, Heckman’s two-step, PSM) and (sub-)sample selection. We show that disregarding the underlying assumptions of these estimation methods may lead to incorrect inferences. Additional analyses show that audited firms’ reported earnings are less informative about future operating performance than earnings of their unaudited counterparts. Our results also indicate that results are sensitive to cost of debt definition and this might have affected the results reported in the existing literature.}},
  author       = {{Kosi, Urska and Koren, Jerney and Valentincic, Aljosa}},
  keywords     = {{private firms, voluntary audit, cost of debt, self-selection bias, lemon problem}},
  location     = {{Paris, France}},
  title        = {{{Does Financial Statement Audit Reduce the Cost of Debt of Private Firms?}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inproceedings{37115,
  author       = {{Kosi, Urska and Florou, Annita and Pope, Peter F. }},
  location     = {{Valencia, Spain}},
  title        = {{{Does Mandatory IFRS Adoption Improve the Credit Relevance of Accounting Information?}}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{3549,
  abstract     = {{Private firms are likely to use the financial reporting process more for other objectives, such as tax savings, than for communicating performance. However, observing firms choosing accounting policies for tax-minimisation purposes is not straightforward due to (i) tax and non-tax costs of reporting lower income (ii) accounting policies that result in lower reported income and no tax savings but generate non-tax benefits (iii) preparers' multiple incentives and (iv) econometric issues. We observe a large sample of 20,505 private firms writing off assets in two separate regimes, one that generates tax savings and one that does not. Firms significantly decrease, but continue to use, write-offs after the adverse change in tax treatment of write-offs. The exogenous tax change should not affect other reporting incentives. This allows us to disentangle the tax-minimisation incentive from other (un-observable) incentives, including debt contracting, dividends and employee relations that contribute to the observed anomalous positive relationship between write-offs and profitability. We show that for private firms (i) obtaining tax savings is important overall (ii) non-tax costs and benefits are probably also important and (iii) earnings informativeness for future cash flows increases after the adverse tax legislation change.}},
  author       = {{Kosi, Urska and Valentincic, Aljosa}},
  journal      = {{European Accounting Review}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{117--150}},
  title        = {{{Write-offs and profitability in private firms: Disentangling the impact of tax-minimisation incentives}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/09638180.2012.661938}},
  volume       = {{22}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@inproceedings{37110,
  author       = {{Florou, Annita and Kosi, Urska}},
  location     = {{Berlin, Germany}},
  title        = {{{Does mandatory IFRS adoption facilitate debt financing? }}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

@article{5045,
  author       = {{Niemann, Rainer and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}},
  issn         = {{0963-8180}},
  journal      = {{European Accounting Review}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{367--390}},
  publisher    = {{Informa UK Limited}},
  title        = {{{Sooner or Later? – Paradoxical Investment Effects of Capital Gains Taxation under Simultaneous Investment and Abandonment Flexibility}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/09638180.2012.682781}},
  volume       = {{22}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}