In this new era where, to create competitive advantage, various firms invest a significant portion of their capital in intangible assets (Goldfigure, 1997) such as the technology and science oriented firms. Investment in intangible assets, for example patents, Human Resource, differs from investment in tangible assets along several aspects related with information asymmetry (Abuja et al, 2005). First, many intangible assets are unique for each firm (Aboody and Lev, 2000), such as brand name, which does not share common characteristics not only across industries but also across firms of same industry. Whereas, tangible assets’ firms share various common characteristics across firms, for example, change in interest rate will affect systematically all real estate firms operating in given geographical region. Moreover, the future benefits and the time periods in which the benefits will endure of intangibles assets vary with firm to firm (Bublitz and Ettredge, 1989). Consequently, Investors cannot perceive the value and the growth of the intangible asset of a firm precisely by observing the assets of other firms. For example, by knowing the brand value of firm General motor, we cannot infer that the brand value of firm Ford motor even both firms operate in similar environment.
Second, there are no organized markets where intangible assets are traded like tangible assets. In the absence of organized markets, investors cannot even use widely accepted assets pricing models to infer the value of intangible assets (Lev, 2001). Finally, financial statements are widely used by investment community in determining the fair value of the stock. However, the most of intangible assets are not shown in balance-sheet but expensed in the income st...
... middle of paper ...
...r mangers.
When a manager who receives a large part of compensation as stocks, then it can be expected that he would sell more stocks in the open market to diversify their holdings. Jin and Kothari (2008) suggest that CEOs’ sells of own stock are positively related with the cost of diversification. Moreover, Ofek and Yermack (2000) state that boards reward more stock-based compensations to boost the ownership of managers, but managers sell a part of shareholdings in the open market to diversify away unsystematic risk from their personal portfolio because the risk for managers is greater than ordinary investors since managers’ human capital already have high correlation with the firm’s performance. Therefore, it can be expected that the increased use of stock-based compensation plan leads to increase in the amount of share sold by executives, ceteris paribus.
The fair value of identifiable net assets includes four accounts classified under unrecognized intangibles. In order to determine which unrecognized intangibles is included in goodwill, ASC 805.20.55 was consulted. The Customer List had a fair value of $10M and was not included in goodwill. ASC 805-20-55-4 states that customer lists are licensed and can be sold; hence meeting the first criterion of an identifiable asset and not included in goodwill. Assembled Workforce was among the unrecognized intangibles. According to ASC 805-20-55-6, assembled workforce is included goodwill because it does not meet neither of the identifiable asset criterions. Trademark is not included into goodwill due to the fact that it meets the first criteria of an identifiable asset (ASC 805-20-55-17). The Licensing Agreement is a contractual agreement, meeting the second criteria of the identifiable asset; therefore not incorporated into goodwill (ASC 805-20-55-31). Lastly, In-Process Research & Development is not subsumed into goodwill because technology processes can be sold or exchanged; meeting the first criteria of an identifiable asset (ASC
Bolton, P., Mehran, H. and Shapiro, J. (2010): "Executive Compensation and Risk Taking”. Retrieved Feb 11, 2011 from http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr456.pdf
When a company hires a new Chief Executive Officer (CEO), the company must decide how to compensate the CEO. There are many ways of compensating CEOs, and they all have advantages and disadvantages. These can include things such as salaries, stock options, bonuses, and other benefits. How the company decides to arrange all the things for its CEO can be very crucial to the company’s success. One of the most interesting decision the company must make is whether to give its CEO a golden parachute, and what the company decides to offer as a compensation package, can be one of the most important decision the board of a company makes.
CEO compensation has been a heated debate for many years recently, and it can be argued that they are either overpaid or that there payment is justified by the amount of work they do and their performance. To answer the question about whether CEO compensation is justified it must be looked at by the utilitarian viewpoint where the good of many outweighs the good of one. It is true that many CEO’s are paid an exorbitant amount of money; however, their payment is justified by the amount of money that they bring back to the company and the shareholders. There are many factors that impact the pay that the CEO receives according to Shah et.al CEO compensation relies on more than just the performance of the CEO, there are a number of factors that play a rule in the compensation of the CEO including the fellow people who help govern the corporation (Board of Directors, Audit Committee), the size of the company, and the performance that the CEO accomplishes (2009). In this paper the focus will be on the performace aspect of the CEO.
Since companies are often unable to sell their fixed assets within any reasonable amount of time they are carried on the balance sheet at cost regardless of their actual value. As a result, it is possible for companies to grossly inflate this number, leaving investors with questionable and hard-to-compare asset figures (Investopedia.com, 2003).
The average compensation of Chief Executive Officer’s has risen to stratospheric heights in the recent years. In 1965, the ratio between CEO pay and the average company pay was 24 to 1. By 1980, the ratio had increased to 40 to 1. In 2000, the ratio skyrocketed to 300 to 1 and has bounced around considerably in the last decade. The public considers this to be disproportionate and inequitable executive compensation. There is a debate about whether CEO salaries are excessive or fair and market-based. The question raised is if CEOs are worth their inflated salaries and if not, are there alternatives to the constant escalation of executive compensation. Using Davis and Moore’s Principles of Stratification and Karl Marx, we will analyze cause and effects of increasing CEO salaries and it’s prominence as a current class and inequality topic.
Executive compensation has come under increasing scrutiny in recent literature in the wake of the growing publicity surrounding managerial failures and executive self-interest. Financial experts have long been examining the problem of aligning the performance of executives with their salaries and benefits. Public discontent with the visible top-heaviness of the compensation structure has brought this issue into the spotlight throughout the business world. Experts point to the flaws of traditional payment schemes and offer a number of different solutions. Shareholder value and the success of the firm can be significantly affected by executive performance. Hence, understanding the advantages and costs of the current trends in executive compensation is crucial to the compensation committee of a Fortune 500 corporation.
Lange, Fornaro, and Buttermilch (2015) focused their research on the FASB Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-08, in regards to Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Testing Goodwill for Impairment. The authors elaborated on how reporting has been done in the past and how the changes made for private companies has helped ease the financial reporting of goodwill. In addition, the authors discussed the definition of a public business entity. This helps to allow private companies to determine the proper way to report their financial
It is concluded that neither of the above proposals are adequate in that any practical benefit that results from the proposal such as employee and shareholder engagement are outweighed by the theoretical impact of increasing the overlap of the organs which would alter the structure of company law. The legal side of directors’ remuneration appears to be sufficient with the directors’ duties legislation acting as an efficient preventative measure for the problems that directors’ remuneration creates. Furthermore, shareholders already must approve several payments as such this could be strengthened to tackle the issue and employees are to some extent taken care of within s172 as such it is these sections that need development rather than directors’ remuneration.
Although at the same time functional goals encourage unnecessary risk-taking and increased the probability of unethical and possibly unlawful behavior (James, 2015). All the same, the purpose of executive compensation is an incentive for well-trained executives that make the most of the firm’s value (James, 2015). Further, the benefit that is put in place for the executive is structured to remove all conflicts of interest amongst the executive and shareholders (James, 2015). Although, some workers feel as though the executive compensation is unethical; but according to James (2015) it is given to the executives that are well trained, therefore, it is ethical from his point of view. Additionally, the compensation package assists as an enticement for executives to participate in potentially risky, maximizing activities, and profits that benefit the shareholders whenever ventures are successful (James,
The following essay will expand on the usefulness and flaws of CAPM and other asset evaluation frameworks and in the end showing that despite all the evidence against CAPM it is still a useful model for determining asset investments.
Intangible assets are assets that cannot be physically held, such as copyrights, brand names, trademarks, goodwill, and patents. There are two kinds of intangible assets, definite and indefinite. Definite assets have a useful life and would be amortized ever year to decrease the value, such as trademarks and patents. Indefinite do not have a definite life time and would last as long as the company stays in business. Definite assets need to be amortized based on their useful life by determining the pattern of use for the asset. For example, if a company uses an asset 40% the first year, 30% the next year, and 15% the next 2 years, then it would amortize the value following that pattern. If they do not know the pattern they would use the straight-line
In this essay we will discuss the statement: “In a prosperous society, value is predominantly of an intangible nature”. Value is “the sum of the tangible and intangible benefits and costs to customers” (Kotler & Keller, 2012). The question is however if the tangible or intangible benefits and costs are influencing the value of a product the most. This essay will evince that value is mainly of tangible nature.
Accounting profit can serve as an alternative to intrinsic value. But Buffett states that “...we do not measure the economic significance or performance of Berkshire by its size; we measure by per-share progress.” Accounting reality was conservative, backward looking, and governed by GAAP (measures in terms of net profit), therefore Buffett rejects this alternative. According to the world’s most famous investor, investment decisions should be based on economic reality, not on accounting
From an accountant's perspective, goodwill appears in accounts of a company only when the company has purchased some intangible and valuable economic source. Intangibles such as patents and copyrights are examples of identifiable intangible assets. On the other hand, intangibles such as favorable government regulations, outstanding credit ratings, superior management and good labor relations are examples of unidentifiable intangible assets (Tweedie, 27). Goodwill comprises the complete set of unidentifiable intangible assets held by the reporting entity. Generally, goodwill has appeared to be an umbrella concept embracing many features of a company's activities that could lead to superior earning power, such as excellent management, an outstanding workforce, effective advertising and market penetration.