ABSTRACT Analysts ask managers for forward-looking information in one-third of quarterly conference calls; most frequently, seeking earnings per share guidance. In this study, we examine the long-term consequences of analysts' questions on future manager disclosure choices. Using six types of commonly provided guidance, we find that when analysts request new guidance or ask about prior guidance, managers are more likely to provide similar guidance in future quarters. When analysts do not ask about prior guidance, managers are less likely to provide that type of guidance in the future. This effect is long-lasting, spills over into earnings announcements, and is strongest for firms with the most severe information problems. Our results provide evidence that analysts shape managers' disclosure choices in meaningful ways.

ABSTRACT We study how business press coverage can discipline credit rating agency actions. Because of their greater prominence and visibility to market participants, more widely covered firms can pose greater reputational costs for rating agencies. Consistent with rating agencies limiting such risk, we find that ratings for more widely covered firms are more timely and accurate, downgraded earlier and systematically lower in the year prior to default, and better predictors of default and non-default. We also find that the recent tightening of credit rating standards is largely explained by growing business press coverage of public debt issuers. Additionally, we find that credit rating agencies take explicit actions to improve their ratings by assigning better educated and more experienced analysts to widely covered firms. Moreover, we document that missed defaults of more visible firms create greater negative economic consequences for rating agencies, and that rating improvements following the financial crisis were greater for more visible firms. Data Availability: All data are publicly available from the sources identified in the text.

ABSTRACT Using a dataset of 3,234 letters sent by 434 hedge funds to their investors during 1995–2011, we study what motivates hedge fund managers to make voluntary disclosures. Contrary to the hedge fund industry's reputation for opacity, we observe that managers provide their investors with an array of quantitative and qualitative information about fund returns, risk exposures, holdings, benchmarks, performance attribution, and future prospects. We find that the tensions between the agency costs faced by investors and the proprietary costs faced by managers affect fund disclosures. Consistent with managers reducing proprietary costs, better-performing funds disclose less quantitative data about performance and holdings, and consistent with the presence of agency costs, riskier funds disclose less quantitative information about performance and assets under management.