I show that median earnings surprise has shifted rightward from small negative (miss analyst estimates by a small amount) to zero (meet analyst estimates exactly) to small positive (beat analyst estimates by a small amount) during the 16 years, 1984 to 1999. I show that a rightward temporal shift in median surprise from negative to positive describes earnings, but neither profits nor losses. Median profit surprise shifts within the positive quadrant, from zero to one cent per share. Median loss surprise shifts within the negative quadrant from extreme negative (about ‐33 cents per share) to zero. I show that the median surprise for profits exceeds that for losses in every year. I document significant positive temporal trends in both meet and beat analyst estimates for both profits and losses, but I find a greater frequency of profits that either meet or beat analyst estimates in every year. I find a significant positive temporal trend in positive profits that are “a little bit of good news,” and a significant negative temporal trend in managers who report losses that are an “extreme amount of bad news.” My results are robust to the four internal validity threats I consider—namely temporal changes in: (1) analyst forecast accuracy, (2) the mix of earnings of one sign preceded by earnings of another sign four quarters ago, (3) the timeliness of the most recent analyst forecast, and (4) the I/B/E/S definition of actual earnings. I find that managers of growth firms are relatively more likely than managers of value firms to report good news profits. I show that when they do report positive profit surprises, managers of growth firms are more likely to report “a little bit of good news” in every year.

Accounting changes, Analyst forecasts, Forecast accuracy, Earnings announcement

Lawrence D. Brown, Gordon D. Richardson, Steven J. Schwager, An Information Interpretation of Financial Analyst Superiority in Forecasting Earnings, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Spring, 1987), pp. 49-67

We study a model of financial reporting where investors infer the precision of reported earnings. Reporting a larger earnings surprise reduces the inferred earnings precision, dampening the impact on firm value of reporting higher earnings, and providing a natural demand for smoother earnings. We show that for sufficiently “bad” news, the manager under‐reports earnings by the maximum, preferring to take a “big bath” in the current period in order to report higher future earnings. If the news is “good,” the manager smoothes earnings, with the amount of smoothing depending on the level of cashflows observed. He either over‐reports or partially under‐reports for slightly good news, and gradually increases his under‐reporting as the news gets better, until he is under‐reporting the maximum amount for sufficiently good news. This result holds both when investors are “naïve” and ignore management’s ability to manipulate earnings, or “sophisticated” and correctly infer management’s disclosure strategy.

Analysts forecasts, Interim reporting, Time-series, Analyst forecast revisions

Lawrence D. Brown, Michael S. Rozeff, Univariate Time-Series Models of Quarterly Accounting Earnings per Share: A Proposed Model, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 1979), pp. 179-189

An Empirical Exploration of Complex Accountability in Public Accounting

Analyst forecasts, Analyst forecast consensus, Market association, Timely aggregate analyst forecasts

Andrew D. Cuccia, Gary A. Mc Gill, The Role of Decision Strategies in Understanding Professionals' Susceptibility to Judgment Biases, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Autumn, 2000), pp. 419-435

We examine the relation between public firm presence and import competition. The information created by public firm presence may provide importers with insights they can use for competing with domestic firms. Consistent with this possibility, we document a positive relation between public firm presence and import competition. We find similar results when using differences in the expected costs of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act as a source of plausibly exogenous variation in public firm presence after the act. We use differences in the proportion of German firms reporting publicly around a major enforcement reform as a natural mechanism experiment, and find evidence that financial reporting is a channel through which public firm presence relates to import competition. Additional mechanism tests and a falsification test estimated in the United Kingdom, where public and most private firms report publicly, further support this inference. In total, our evidence is consistent with foreign competitors using the information created by public firm presence, including what public firms disclose in financial reports, to compete with domestic firms. Consequently, our results provide evidence of competitors using the proprietary information disclosed in financial reports to compete with the disclosing firms and of information frictions affecting trade.