Management frequently objects to disclosing additional information on the grounds that it is proprietary. For instance, when the FASB proposed to expand disclosures on (a) accounting for stock-based employee compensation (issued in December 2002) and (b) business segment performance (issued in June 1997), many corporate managers expressed strong opposition to both proposals. What are the potential proprietary costs from expanded disclosures in each of these areas? If you conclude that proprietary costs are relatively low for either, what alternative explanations do you have for management’s opposition?
Answer to relevant QuestionsJudith, an accounting major, states, “Strategy analysis seems to be an unnecessary detour in doing financial statement analysis. Why can’t we just get straight to the accounting issues?” Explain to Judith why she might ...Explain why you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:a. It’s better to be a differentiator than a cost leader, since you can then charge premium prices.b. It’s more profitable to be in a ...A fund manager states, “I refuse to buy any company that makes a voluntary accounting change, since it’s certainly a case of management trying to hide bad news.” Can you think of any alternative interpretation?In contrast to U.S. GAAP, IFRS permits management to reverse impairment on fixed assets which have increased in value since the time of their impairment. Revaluations are typically based on estimates of realizable value made ...When companies decide to shift from private to public financing by making an initial public offering for their stock, they are likely to face increased costs of investor communications. Given this additional cost, why would ...
Post your question