We have formulated the mean-variance models of portfolio selection with stochastic cash demand. The results of the general model have indicated that the characteristic of the investor's stochastic cash demand, the liquidity risks of assets (measured by the covariance between an asset's return and the cash demand), and the structure of transfer costs also play important roles in the determination of the investor's optimal portfolio. We have also shown that the model of portfolio selection with stochastic cash demand can be greatly simplified if the assumption of symmetric transfer costs is invoked. Furthermore, it has been shown that the simplified model can be reformulated and solved by the LP techniques. Thus, LP formulation of portfolio selection with stochastic cash demand should have practical usefulness.Finally, along the line of works by Chen, Jen and Zionts [3, 4], Pogue [14, 15] and Stone and Reback [20], one can extend the analysis in this paper to the problem of dynamic portfolio management with stochastic cash demand and transfer costs.

To find out whether attesters and users of corporate financial reports have any consensus about the value of information included in published corporate annual reports for equity investment decisions, Professor Gyan Chandra surveyed 600 Certified Public Accountants randomly selected from employees of big eight accounting firms and 400 randomly selected Certified Financial Analysts. This article offers a different interpretation of the data reported in Professor Chandra's work. Based upon differences in the mean responses of the questionnaire, Chandra concluded that disparity between accountants and security analysts exists on the value of selected accounting information items for equity investment decisions. Authors have suggested that the observed differences may not be an indication of a lack of consensus on the value of these information items for equity investment decisions. Rather, the observed differences in the survey results may be a result of differences in the way in which these two different subject groups responded to the questionnaire.