IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jbfnac/v42y2015i1-2p138-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Explains the Valuation Difference between Intangible-intensive Profit and Loss Firms?

Author

Listed:
  • Mustafa Ciftci
  • Masako Darrough

Abstract

Prior research suggests that loss firms are valued based on their abandonment/adaptation option values, while profit firms are valued as going concerns. However, conservative accounting treatment of expensing of R&D leads many R&D-intensive firms to report losses even though they are not in financial distress. In this paper we investigate the difference in valuation of profit and loss firms that invest in intangibles, either through internal development (R&D) or purchases. The accounting treatment for internally developed intangibles is conservative in that US GAAP requires immediate expensing. Yet, it allows recognition of purchased intangibles. We find that in valuation of firms with high recognized-intangible assets, book value has more prominence in loss firms than profit firms, while that is not the case for firms with high R&D expenditures. This suggests that their abandonment/adaptation option explains the difference in valuation between profit and loss firms with high recognized-intangibles, while conservative accounting explains the valuation difference between profit and loss firms with high R&D intensity. This result suggests that recognition of intangibles in financial statements might mitigate the conservative bias in accounting numbers.

Suggested Citation

  • Mustafa Ciftci & Masako Darrough, 2015. "What Explains the Valuation Difference between Intangible-intensive Profit and Loss Firms?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1-2), pages 138-166, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:42:y:2015:i:1-2:p:138-166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jbfa.12108
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Stephen & Lo, Kin & Lys, Thomas, 1999. "Use of R2 in accounting research: measuring changes in value relevance over the last four decades," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 83-115, December.
    2. Anne Cazavan-Jeny & Thomas Jeanjean, 2006. "The negative impact of R&D capitalization: A value relevance approach," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 37-61.
    3. Dennis R. Oswald, 2008. "The Determinants and Value Relevance of the Choice of Accounting for Research and Development Expenditures in the United Kingdom," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1‐2), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Holthausen, Robert W. & Watts, Ross L., 2001. "The relevance of the value-relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 3-75, September.
    5. Amir, Eli & Lev, Baruch, 1996. "Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: The wireless communications industry," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1-3), pages 3-30, October.
    6. William Rees & Aljosa Valentincic, 2013. "Dividend Irrelevance and Accounting Models of Value," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5-6), pages 646-672, June.
    7. Dongmei Li, 2011. "Financial Constraints, R&D Investment, and Stock Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(9), pages 2974-3007.
    8. Louis K. C. Chan & Josef Lakonishok & Theodore Sougiannis, 2001. "The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(6), pages 2431-2456, December.
    9. Francis, J & Schipper, K, 1999. "Have financial statements lost their relevance?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 319-352.
    10. Barth, Mary E. & Beaver, William H. & Landsman, Wayne R., 1998. "Relative valuation roles of equity book value and net income as a function of financial health," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-34, February.
    11. Saeed Akbar & Andrew W. Stark, 2003. "Deflators, Net Shareholder Cash Flows, Dividends, Capital Contributions and Estimated Models of Corporate Valuation," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(9-10), pages 1211-1233.
    12. Mary E. Barth & Greg Clinch, 2009. "Scale Effects in Capital Markets-Based Accounting Research," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3-4), pages 253-288.
    13. Markarian, Garen & Pozza, Lorenzo & Prencipe, Annalisa, 2008. "Capitalization of R&D costs and earnings management: Evidence from Italian listed companies," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 246-267, September.
    14. Stephen H. Penman, 2009. "Accounting for Intangible Assets: There is Also an Income Statement," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(3), pages 358-371, September.
    15. Barth, Mary E. & Beaver, William H. & Landsman, Wayne R., 2001. "The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting: another view," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 77-104, September.
    16. Zoltan Matolcsy & Anne Wyatt, 2006. "Capitalized intangibles and financial analysts," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(3), pages 457-479, September.
    17. Lev, Baruch & Sougiannis, Theodore, 1996. "The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 107-138, February.
    18. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-636, May-June.
    19. Wu, Hai & Fargher, Neil & Wright, Sue, 2010. "Accounting for investments and the relevance of losses to firm value," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 104-127, March.
    20. Thomas D. Dowdell & Steve C. Lim & Eric Press, 2009. "Were In-Process Research and Development Charges Too Aggressive?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5-6), pages 531-551.
    21. Ciftci, Mustafa & Cready, William M., 2011. "Scale effects of R&D as reflected in earnings and returns," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 62-80, June.
    22. Mustafa Ciftci & Masako Darrough & Raj Mashruwala, 2014. "Value Relevance of Accounting Information for Intangible-Intensive Industries and the Impact of Scale: The US Evidence," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 199-226, June.
    23. Dennis R. Oswald, 2008. "The Determinants and Value Relevance of the Choice of Accounting for Research and Development Expenditures in the United Kingdom," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1-2), pages 1-24.
    24. Lev, B & Zarowin, P, 1999. "The boundaries of financial reporting and how to extend them," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 353-385.
    25. Collins, Daniel W. & Maydew, Edward L. & Weiss, Ira S., 1997. "Changes in the value-relevance of earnings and book values over the past forty years," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 39-67, December.
    26. David Ashton & Pengguo Wang, 2013. "Valuation Weights, Linear Dynamics and Accounting Conservatism: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1-2), pages 1-25, January.
    27. Jiang, Wei & Stark, Andrew W., 2013. "Dividends, research and development expenditures, and the value relevance of book value for UK loss-making firms," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 112-124.
    28. Saeed Akbar & Andrew W. Stark, 2003. "Deflators, Net Shareholder Cash Flows, Dividends, Capital Contributions and Estimated Models of Corporate Valuation," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(9‐10), pages 1211-1233, December.
    29. Laurel A. Franzen & Kimberly J. Rodgers & Timothy T. Simin, 2007. "Measuring Distress Risk: The Effect of R&D Intensity," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(6), pages 2931-2967, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dreher, Sandra & Eichfelder, Sebastian & Noth, Felix, 2017. "Predicting earnings and cash flows: The information content of losses and tax loss carryforwards," IWH Discussion Papers 30/2017, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    2. Mittal, Amit & Garg, Ajay Kumar, 2017. "Private information implications for acquirers and targets in horizontal mergers," MPRA Paper 85355, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Michalis Makrominas, 2017. "Recognized intangibles and the present value of growth options," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 311-329, February.
    4. Woo Sung Kim & Kunsu Park & Sang Hoon Lee & Hongyoung Kim, 2018. "R&D Investments and Firm Value: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    5. Kannan, Yezen & Khallaf, Ashraf & Gleason, Kimberly & Bostan, Ibrahim, 2023. "The relationship between R&D intensity, conservatism, and management earnings forecast issuance," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    6. Costanza Di Fabio, 2016. "Book Review," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 113-121.
    7. Dreher, Sandra & Eichfelder, Sebastian & Noth, Felix, 2022. "Does IFRS information on tax loss carryforwards and negative performance improve predictions of earnings and cash flows?," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 276, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    8. Brasel, Kelsey R. & Hill, Mary S. & Taylor, Gary K., 2022. "The relevance of GAAP vs. non-GAAP net assets to creditors: An examination of the credit default swap market," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    9. Feng Gu & Baruch Lev & Chenqi Zhu, 2023. "All losses are not alike: Real versus accounting-driven reported losses," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 1141-1189, September.
    10. Jaimin Goh & Jaehong Lee & Wonchang Hur & Yunchang Ju, 2019. "Do Analysts Fully Reflect Information in Patents about Future Earnings?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Atoche, Teresa duarte & Pérez lópez, José ángel & Camúñez ruiz, Jose antonio, 2012. "La relevancia de los gastos de I+D. Estudio empírico en el sector del automóvil," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 257-286.
    2. Tami Dinh Thi & Wolfgang Schultze, 2011. "Capitalizing research & development and ‘other information’: the incremental information content of accruals versus cash flows," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 241-278, November.
    3. Jihene Chedlia Soussi, 2012. "Impact of Voluntary Disclosure on the Relevance of Accounting Information," Journal of Education and Vocational Research, AMH International, vol. 3(5), pages 138-153.
    4. Mustafa Ciftci & Nan Zhou, 2016. "Capitalizing R&D expenses versus disclosing intangible information," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 661-689, April.
    5. Schaberl, Philipp D., 2016. "Beyond accounting and back: An empirical examination of the relative relevance of earnings and “other” information," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 98-113.
    6. Gjerde, Øystein & Knivsflå, Kjell & Sættem, Frode, 2011. "The value relevance of financial reporting in Norway 1965-2004," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 113-128, March.
    7. Dinh, Tami & Schultze, Wolfgang, 2022. "Accounting for R&D on the income statement? Evidence on non-discretionary vs. discretionary R&D capitalization under IFRS in Germany," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    8. Denise A. Jones, 2018. "Using real options theory to explain patterns in the valuation of research and development expenditures," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 575-593, October.
    9. Maigoshi, Zaharaddeen Salisu & Latif, Rohaida Abdul & Kamardin, Hasnah, 2018. "Change in value-relevance of disclosed RPT across accounting regimes: Evidence from Malaysia," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 422-433.
    10. Abdulrahman Alomair & Alan Farley & Helen Hong Yang, 2022. "The impact of IFRS adoption on the value relevance of accounting information in Saudi Arabia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2839-2878, June.
    11. Dan Givoly & Carla Hayn & Sharon Katz, 2017. "The changing relevance of accounting information to debt holders over time," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 64-108, March.
    12. Gjerde, Øystein & Knivsflå, Kjell Henry & Sættem, Frode, 2005. "The Value Relevance of Financial Reporting on the Oslo Stock Exchange over the Period 1964-2003," Discussion Papers 2005/23, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    13. Douglas Skinner, 2008. "Accounting for intangibles – a critical review of policy recommendations," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 191-204.
    14. F. Tsoligkas & I. Tsalavoutas, 2011. "Value relevance of R&D in the UK after IFRS mandatory implementation," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(13), pages 957-967.
    15. Dargenidou, Christina & Jackson, Richard H.G. & Tsalavoutas, Ioannis & Tsoligkas, Fanis, 2021. "Capitalisation of R&D and the informativeness of stock prices: Pre- and post-IFRS evidence," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    16. Elisabeth Dedman & Sulaiman Mouselli & Yun Shen & Andrew W. Stark, 2009. "Accounting, Intangible Assets, Stock Market Activity, and Measurement and Disclosure Policy—Views From the U.K," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(3), pages 312-341, September.
    17. Y. Xie & H. Lee (Correspondence author), 2018. "Tunneling and Value Relevance of Financial Reports: Evidence from Hong Kong," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 11, pages 67-82, February.
    18. Oliveira, Lídia & Rodrigues, Lúcia Lima & Craig, Russell, 2010. "Intangible assets and value relevance: Evidence from the Portuguese stock exchange," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 241-252.
    19. Vinay Goyal & Subrata K. Mitra, 2022. "Is the asymmetric impact of aggregate revenue and aggregate earnings on the stock index in accordance with the prospect theory?," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 200-222, March.
    20. Rubio Martín, Gracia & Rodríguez Paredes, Mercedes & Maroto Acín, Juan Antonio, 2013. "La escasa relevancia de la información contable sobre los activos intangibles en la valoración de las empresas innovadoras españolas: el caso de los sectores farmacéutico y biotecnológico || The Low I," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 16(1), pages 68-94, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:42:y:2015:i:1-2:p:138-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0306-686X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.