@article{5048, author = {{Vollert, Pia and Eikel, Carolin and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Steuer und Wirtschaft}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{367--379}}, title = {{{Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) als Instrument zur Vermeidung von Verrechnungspreiskonflikten – eine kritische Betrachtung}}}, volume = {{90}}, year = {{2013}}, } @inbook{2608, author = {{Betz, Stefan}}, booktitle = {{Entscheidungsprobleme im Supply Chain Management - Quantitative Lösungsansätze für den Mittelstand}}, editor = {{Betz, Stefan}}, pages = {{49--72}}, title = {{{Entscheidungsorientierte Planung unscharfer Erfolge von KMU in Supply Chains}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @inbook{2609, author = {{Betz, Stefan}}, booktitle = {{Entscheidungsprobleme im Supply Chain Management - Quantitative Lösungsansätze für den Mittelstand}}, editor = {{Betz, Stefan}}, pages = {{105--132}}, title = {{{Analyse des Bullwhip-Effekts in einer Supply Chain von KMU}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @book{2668, editor = {{Betz, Stefan}}, title = {{{Entscheidungsprobleme im Supply Chain Management - Quantitative Lösungsansätze für den Mittelstand}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @techreport{20870, abstract = {{This study shows how venture capital investors can identify potential biases in multi-year management forecasts before an investment decision and derive significantly more accurate failure predictions. By advancing a cross-sectional projection method developed by prior research and using firm-specific information in financial statements and business plans, we derive benchmarks for management revenue forecasts. With these benchmarks, we estimate forecast errors as an a priori measure of biased expectations. Using this measure for our proprietary dataset on venture-backed start-ups in Germany, we find evidence of substantial upward forecast biases. We uncover that firms with large forecast errors fail significantly more often than do less biased entrepreneurs in years following the investment. Overall, our results highlight the implications of excessive optimism and overconfidence in entrepreneurial environments and emphasize the relevance of accounting information and business plans for venture capital investment decisions.}}, author = {{Sievers, Sönke and Mokwa, Christopher Frederik}}, keywords = {{Management forecast biases, cross-sectional projection models, venture-backed start-ups, failure prediction, overoptimism, overconfidence}}, pages = {{31}}, title = {{{The Relevance of Biases in Management Forecasts for Failure Prediction in Venture Capital Investments}}}, doi = {{10.2139/ssrn.2100501}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{22920, author = {{Gries, Thomas and Prior, Ulrich and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Journal of Public Economic Theory}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{521--545}}, title = {{{A Tax Paradox for Investment Decisions under Uncertainty}}}, doi = {{10.1007/BF03342734}}, volume = {{14}}, year = {{2012}}, } @techreport{5051, author = {{Hegemann, Annika}}, title = {{{Besteuerung von Beteiligungsinvestitionen und Risikoempfindlichkeit – Wie wirkt die Abgeltungssteuer?}}}, volume = {{140}}, year = {{2012}}, } @techreport{5055, author = {{Mehrmann, Annika and Schneider, Georg and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, title = {{{Asymmetric Taxation of Profits and Losses and Its Influence on Investment Timing: Paradoxical Effects of Tax Increases}}}, volume = {{134}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{5056, author = {{Sloane, Peter F. E. and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Wirtschaft und Beruf}}, number = {{7-8}}, pages = {{10--13}}, title = {{{Mehr Theorie wagen. Betriebswirtschaftslehre nach Bologna oder Hochschulbildung im Wandel}}}, volume = {{64}}, year = {{2012}}, } @misc{5057, author = {{Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, booktitle = {{Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}}, number = {{112}}, pages = {{12}}, title = {{{Analytisch und strukturiert denken lernen}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @misc{5060, author = {{Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, booktitle = {{Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}}, title = {{{Studium nach Bologna: Theorie oder Praxis – ein Scheinwiderspruch?}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{5063, author = {{Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Wirtschaft und Beruf}}, number = {{7-8}}, pages = {{49--51}}, title = {{{Unternehmensführung und interkulturelle Hochschulbildung. Unternehmensführung in Europa - Interkulturelle Fragen}}}, volume = {{64}}, year = {{2012}}, } @inbook{5066, author = {{Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, booktitle = {{Der Verband der Hochschullehrer für Betriebswirtschaft, Geschichte des VHB und Geschichten zum VHB}}, editor = {{Burr, Wolfgang and Wagenhofer, Alfred}}, publisher = {{Gabler Verlag}}, title = {{{Vorwort. Geschichte des VHB und der BWL: Rückblick und Einblicke}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @misc{5069, author = {{Sureth-Sloane, Caren and zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, Dodo}}, booktitle = {{Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}}, number = {{276}}, pages = {{12}}, title = {{{Welcher BWLer ist ein guter Forscher?}}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{5193, abstract = {{We study the predictive ability of individual analyst target price changes for post-event abnormal stock returns within each recommendation category. Although prior studies generally demonstrate the investment value of target prices, we find that target price changes do not cause abnormal returns within each recommendation level. Instead, contradictory analyst signals (e.g., strong buy reiterations with large target price decreases) neutralize each other, whereas confirmatory signals reinforce each other. Further, our analysis reveals that large target price downgrades can be explained by preceding stock price decreases. However, upgrades are not preceded by stock price increases, thereby demonstrating asymmetric analyst behavior when adjusting target prices to stock prices. Our results suggest that investors should treat recommendations with caution when they are issued with large contradictory target price changes. Thus, instead of blindly following a recommendation, investors might put more weight on the change in the corresponding target price and consider transaction costs.}}, author = {{Kanne, Stefan and Klobucnik, Jan and Kreutzmann, Daniel and Sievers, Sönke}}, journal = {{Financial Markets and Portfolio Management (VHB-JOURQUAL 3 Ranking C)}}, keywords = {{Analyst recommendation, Target price, Stock performance, Trading strategy}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{405--428}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{{To buy or not to buy? The value of contradictory analyst signals}}}, doi = {{10.1007/s11408-012-0196-z}}, volume = {{26}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{5196, abstract = {{This study shows how venture capital investors can identify potential biases in multi-year management forecasts before an investment decision and derive significantly more accurate failure predictions. By advancing a cross-sectional projection method developed by prior research and using firm-specific information in financial statements and business plans, we derive benchmarks for management revenue forecasts. With these benchmarks, we estimate forecast errors as an a priori measure of biased expectations. Using this measure for our proprietary dataset on venture-backed start-ups in Germany, we find evidence of substantial upward forecast biases. We uncover that firms with large forecast errors fail significantly more often than do less biased entrepreneurs in years following the investment. Overall, our results highlight the implications of excessive optimism and overconfidence in entrepreneurial environments and emphasize the relevance of accounting information and business plans for venture capital investment decisions. }}, author = {{Mokwa, Christopher Frederik and Sievers, Sönke}}, journal = {{SSRN Electronic Journal}}, keywords = {{Management forecast biases, cross-sectional projection models, venture-backed start-ups, failure prediction, overoptimism, overconfidence}}, title = {{{The Relevance of Biases in Management Forecasts for Failure Prediction in Venture Capital Investments}}}, doi = {{10.2139/ssrn.2100501}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{5198, abstract = {{This study provides evidence of significant biases in multi-year management forecasts by analyzing a proprietary dataset on venture-backed start-ups in Germany. We find that revenues and expenses are highly overestimated in each of the investigated one- to five-year-ahead planning periods. Furthermore, entrepreneurs underestimate one-year-ahead profit forecasts but clearly overestimate their profit forecasts for all longer-term forecast horizons. Additional analyses reveal that teams with prior management experience issue even more overestimated forecasts and misrepresent their forward-looking information. In contrast, greater asset verifiability and corporate lead investors are associated with lower levels of forecast errors. All key results hold if bias is either measured by traditionally comparing forecasts to ex-post realizations or by using a cross-sectional projection approach based on historical accounting data developed by prior research. }}, author = {{Mokwa, Christopher and Sievers, Sönke}}, journal = {{SSRN Electronic Journal}}, keywords = {{Management forecasts, Forecasting biases, Venture-backed start-ups, Projection methods}}, title = {{{Biases in Management Forecasts of Venture-Backed Start-Ups: Evidence from Internal Due Diligence Documents of VC Investors}}}, doi = {{10.2139/ssrn.1714399}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{4399, abstract = {{Using a unique sample of 749 cash and synthetic securitization transactions issued by 60 stock-listed bank holdings in the EU-13 plus Switzerland over the period from 1997 to 2007 this paper provides empirical evidence that credit risk securitization has a negative impact on the issuing banks’ financial soundness. Baseline findings hold even when controlling for likely reverse causality by employing instrumental variable techniques and substituting the accounting-based z-score ratio by market-based indicators of bank risk. Moreover, investigating the relationship between credit risk securitization and single z-score components in order to evaluate significant transmission channels proposed by relevant theoretical literature, we find a negative impact of securitization on bank profitability and capital environment as well as a positive relationship between securitization and the issuing bank's return volatility. Against the background of our empirical results we underline that the decision by the Basel Committee to enhance the new Basel III framework in the field of securitization is a step in the right direction.}}, author = {{Michalak, Tobias C. and Uhde, André}}, journal = {{Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance}}, keywords = {{Credit risk securitization Bank soundness European banking}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{272--285}}, title = {{{ Credit risk securitization and bank soundness: Evidence from the microlevel for Europe}}}, doi = {{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2012.04.008}}, volume = {{52}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{4401, abstract = {{Employing data on foreign bank claims from 13 OECD countries on 51 emerging markets between 1993 and 2007, this study investigates specific characteristics of OECD banking markets and lending banks as new important determinants of cross-border lending. We initially provide empirical evidence that in addition to well-accepted “gravity measures”, characteristics of OECD banking markets as well as lending banks’ attributes may describe further important determinants of cross-border bank lending with regard to our sample. Building subsamples of more-developed emerging markets vs. frontier markets, addressing (non) common lender relationships and analyzing cross border lending flows during different time periods, our analysis additionally reveals that both the determinants’ explanatory power and their direction of impact notably vary with respective subsamples.}}, author = {{Müller, Oliver and Uhde, André}}, journal = {{Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions & Money}}, keywords = {{Foreign bank claims, Gravity measures, OECD banking markets’ characteristics, Lending banks’ characteristics}}, pages = {{136--162}}, title = {{{Cross-border bank lending - Empirical evidence on further determinants from OECD banking markets}}}, doi = {{DOI: 10.1016/j.intfin.2012.09.004 }}, volume = {{23}}, year = {{2012}}, } @article{4403, abstract = {{Using a unique cross‐sectional dataset of 381 cash and synthetic securitizations issued by 53 banks from the EU‐15 plus Switzerland between 1997 and 2007, this paper provides empirical evidence for time‐dependent negative wealth effects of credit risk securitization announcements in European banking. Baseline results hold when comparing estimated wealth effects with a control group of similar but non‐securitizing banks for the relevant time period. Moreover, building several sub samples we find that the nexus between credit risk securitization, the issuing banks’ overall risk exposure and wealth effects is associated with a variety of transaction‐ and bank‐specific factors. }}, author = {{Farruggio, Christian and Michalak, Tobias C. and Uhde, André}}, journal = {{Journal of Business Finance and Accounting}}, keywords = {{wealth effects, credit risk securitization, Europe, event study}}, number = {{1&2}}, pages = {{193--228}}, title = {{{Wealth effects of credit risk securitization in European Banking}}}, doi = {{https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.2012.02273.x}}, volume = {{39}}, year = {{2012}}, }