This paper re-evaluates evidence in Ayers and Freeman [Ayers, F., Freeman, R., 1997. Market assessment of industry and firm earnings information. Journal of Accounting and Economics 24, 205–218] suggesting that investors anticipate industry-wide components of earnings earlier than firm-specific components, and that post-earnings-announcement drift following annual earnings announcements is due primarily to firm-specific components of earnings. Our tests indicate that post-announcement drift is entirely attributable to coefficient bias due to measurement errors in the use of realized earnings changes as proxies for unexpected earnings. Also, coefficient differences in the market's anticipation of subsequent-year industry and firm-specific earnings become insignificant when we introduce suitable controls for non-linearity in the return/earnings relation.

We investigate performance effects for China's listed firms when there is a change in the controlling shareholder. These changes include ownership transfers from one state entity to another state entity and from a state entity to a private entity. We find positive performance effects when control is passed to a private entity. In contrast, when the transfer is made to another branch of the state, there is little change in performance. The stock market responds positively to a change in control, with the largest effect observed for private transfers. Our results suggest the Chinese government should continue to sell down its share ownership in listed firms as the transfer of control to private owners enhances corporate profitability and efficiency. Moreover, to help ownership reform, China should encourage an active market for corporate control.

A large empirical literature has documented that firm-level differences in productivity, size, ownership status, and other characteristics are crucial to understanding differences in firms’ decisions to export. The evidence strongly supports the self-selection of more productive firms into export markets, but there has been more mixed evidence on the subsequent feedback effects of exporting on the future path of firm productivity. Several recent papers have introduced a new dimension into this export-productivity relationship: firm-level investments in productivity-enhancing activities such as R&D. James A. Costantini and Marc J. Melitz (2007), Alla Lileeva and Daniel Trefler (2007), and Paula Bustos (2006) explore the linkages between investments in innovation, productivity, and the decision to export in the context of the liberalization of trade regimes. Aw, Roberts, and Tor Winston (2007) have also found a significant role for firm R&D investments in explaining Taiwanese firm export patterns, as well as interaction effects between firm R&D and export choices in explaining productivity change. In this paper we summarize some empirical results from our research project to develop an estimable structural model of the joint exportinvestment decision. In the theoretical model, firms invest in R&D and physical capital, which can affect the path of future productivity for the firm. R&D investment, through its effect on future productivity, increases the profits from exporting, and participation in the export market raises the return to R&D investments. The theoretical model yields equations for the policy functions for R&D investment, physical investment, and the exporting decision, as well as the evolution of firm-level profitability, that can be estimated with micro datasets containing R&D Investments, Exporting, and the Evolution of Firm Productivity