Management Forecasts

Management net Forecasts A Review and Framework by D. E. Hirst, L. Koonce and S. Venkataraman explained the antecedents, characteristics and consequences interlinked with earnings heralds. Antecedents ar characteristics that ar prevalent antecedent to the consequence such as the existing environs/firm specific characteristics and consequence is the outcome from antecedents and characteristics. Characteristics atomic number 18 the choices the management has deciding on how the report go away be doused.The article guides the reader big explanations of why management decides to release earnings forecasts, interactions of the three variables and its findings and how these findings may shock wizard period to an opposite. Studies have found that management may issue forecasted earnings to reduce difference of opinions and/or information with the carry onholders, to reduce judicial proceeding risks when the entity needs to make bad news disclosures and when managers have equity -based compensation fastened to extend their wealth.Case Summary According to the case, Management Earnings revealing and Pro Forma Reporting by Mark T. Bradshaw and Jacob Cohen states that companies too often draw off information that negatively impacts the companys earnings per circumstances on their pro forma reports prior to releasing the financial statements that is in accordance with principally accepted accounting principles which is based on companies who have released such reports and the reception to such describe by the regulators.According to the case, pro forma reporting was originated by the SEC to provide earnings comparability for investors for differing time periods based on a what if analysis, meaning, what would have happened if this transaction had occurred and what wouldve been its impact on later reporting periods (Regulation S-X 1982). However, multiple incidents have shown that companies abuse the system. Proxim and Cisco, Inc. , both released their p ro forma reports prior to their financial statements being released where both of the companies excluded the look into and development costs, restructuring charges, mpairment/amortization of goodwill, which resulted in an boilers suit positive net income with net income per share, whereas the financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles resulted in a loss with loss per share for both of the companies.Managers who are trying to disclose bad news about the company are more likely to issue earnings forecasts in order to avoid litigations (Skinner 1994, 1997). In addition, Trump Hotels and Casino, Inc. DJT) also excluded a onetime charge term including a onetime gain of $17. 2 million, exceeding the analysts estimates of $0. 54 per share to $0. 63 per share on their pro forma reporting (Burns 2002). The Securities and Exchange missionary station (SEC) responded to their incautious reporting and DJT acknowledged the findings and consented to unyiel ding commitments if similar violations were to take value again. The DJT incident was the first time the commissions took action against abusing pro forma reporting.Financial forecast data rating agencies such as Standard & Poors (S&P) recommended for companies to include in their in operation(p) earnings such as restructuring charges, write-downs of assets, rakehell-option expenses and research and development costs and furthermore S&P suggested companies to exclude from operating earnings the following four categories 1) goodwill write-downs 2) charges for litigation 3) gains and losses on asset sales and 4) expenses related to mergers and acquisitions (Leisman and Weil 2001).Although S&P made recommendations, Proxim, Inc. , distillery excluded restructuring charges, research and development costs while Cisco Systems, Inc. , also excluded restructuring, stock option exercise and research and developments costs on their pro forma reports, one of the reasons might be based on th e belief that stock prices will fluctuate with high volatility, for example, when Rainforest Cafe announced earnings per share that was lower than expectations the stock price plummeted by 40% on a single day (Sloan and Skinner).Although managers may want to convince the investors their companys value by providing pro forma reports that is plausible, they may want to consider the occurrence that this is only short term credibility because according to Hirst et al. (1999) only when the prior forecast is accurate do they consider future forecasts.The choices arent readable on why the management continues to release misleading pro forma reports, the incentives commode them may be bonuses tied to stock prices or on the other hand management may want to release pro forma reports that is isobilateral to financial statements to reduce the asymmetry of information between managers, analysts and shareholders (Ajinkya and Gift 1984 Verrecchia 2001).It would be best for management to issue accurate pro forma reports to maintain creditability with the shareholders and the analysts because in the long-run the investors will depend on the entitys reports for accuracy consequently creating creditability which is the fundamental foundation of any business.