@article{5111, author = {{Gilroy, Bernard Michael and Schreckenberg, Heike and Seiler, Volker}}, journal = {{Federal Governance}}, number = {{2}}, pages = {{3--18}}, publisher = {{MISC}}, title = {{{Subsidiarity between economic freedom and harmonized regulation: is there an optimal degree of European integration?}}}, volume = {{10}}, year = {{2013}}, } @article{5112, author = {{Gilroy, Bernard Michael and Lukas, Elmar and Heimann, Christian}}, journal = {{Jahrbücher für Nationalokonomie 6 Statistik}}, title = {{{Technologiestandort Deutschland und internationale Wissensspillover.}}}, volume = {{233}}, year = {{2013}}, } @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}}, } @article{5114, author = {{Gilroy, Bernard Michael and Heimann, Anastasia and Schopf, Mark}}, journal = {{Basic Income Studies}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{43--70}}, publisher = {{De Gruyter}}, title = {{{Basic income and labour supply: The German case}}}, volume = {{8}}, year = {{2013}}, } @article{5115, author = {{Gilroy, Bernard Michael and Nguyen, Birke Thuy Duong}}, journal = {{WiSt-Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Studium}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{134--140}}, publisher = {{Verlag Franz Vahlen GmbH}}, title = {{{Ist Fairer Handel Wirklich Fair?}}}, volume = {{42}}, year = {{2013}}, } @techreport{5117, author = {{Gilroy, Bernard Michael and Schreckenberg, Heike and Seiler, Volker}}, title = {{{Water as an alternative asset}}}, year = {{2013}}, } @techreport{5146, abstract = {{In this paper, we analyze a model in which two divisions negotiate over an intrafirm transfer price for an intermediate product. Formally, we consider bargaining problems under incomplete information, since the upstream division’s (seller's) costs and downstream division's (buyer's) revenues are supposed to be private information. Assuming two possible types for buyer and seller each, we first establish that the bargaining problem is regular, regardless whether incentive and/or efficiency constraints are imposed. This allows us to apply the generalized Nash bargaining solution to determine transfer payments and transfer probabilities. Furthermore, we derive general properties of this solution for the transfer pricing problem and compare the model developed here with the existing literature for negotiated transfer pricing under incomplete information. In particular, we focus on the models presented in Wagenhofer (1994).}}, author = {{Brangewitz, Sonja and Haake, Claus-Jochen}}, keywords = {{Transfer Pricing, Negotiation, Generalized Nash Bargaining Solution, Incomplete Information}}, publisher = {{CIE Working Paper Series, Paderborn University}}, title = {{{Cooperative Transfer Price Negotiations under Incomplete Information}}}, volume = {{64}}, 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}}, }