Betas used by professors: A survey with 2,500 answers
We report 2,510 answers from professors from 65 countries and 934 institutions. 1,791 respondents use betas, but 107 of them do not justify the betas they use. 97.3% of the professors that justify the betas use regressions, webs, databases, textbooks or papers (the paper specifies which ones), although many of them state that calculated betas "are poorly measured and have many problems". Only 0.9% of the professors justify the beta using exclusively personal judgement (named qualitative, common sense, intuitive, and logical magnitude betas by different professors). The paper includes interesting comments from 160 professors. We all admit that different investors may have different expected cash flows, but many of us affirm that the required return should be equal for everybody: That is a kind of schizophrenic approach to valuation. Most professors teach that the expected cash flows should be computed using common sense and good judgement about the company, its industry, the national economies¿ However, many professors teach a formula to calculate the discount rate (instead of using again common sense).
|Date of creation:||09 Sep 2009|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: IESE Business School, Av Pearson 21, 08034 Barcelona, SPAIN|
Web page: http://www.iese.edu/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ebg:iesewp:d-0822. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Noelia Romero)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.