IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fma/fmanag/carleton98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimism Biases among Brokerage and Non-Brokerage Firms' Equity Recommendations: Agency Costs in the Investment Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Willard T. Carleton
  • Carl R. Chen
  • Thomas I. Steiner

Abstract

This study examines recommendations made by brokerage and non-brokerage firms to evaluate the differential agency costs across three unique production environments. The results highlight and outline the inherent differences between brokerage and non-brokerage firms' recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Willard T. Carleton & Carl R. Chen & Thomas I. Steiner, 1998. "Optimism Biases among Brokerage and Non-Brokerage Firms' Equity Recommendations: Agency Costs in the Investment Industry," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 27(1), Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:fma:fmanag:carleton98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rob Brown & Howard W. H. Chan & Yew Kee Ho, 2007. "Initiating coverage, broker reputation and management earnings forecasts in Australia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 47(3), pages 401-421, September.
    2. Wang, Jian & Sheng, Jiliang & Yang, Jun, 2013. "Optimism bias and incentive contracts in portfolio delegation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 493-499.
    3. Galanti, Sébastien & Vaubourg, Anne Gaël, 2017. "Optimism bias in financial analysts' earnings forecasts: Do commissions sharing agreements reduce conflicts of interest?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 325-337.
    4. Ying Zhang & Peggy Swanson, 2010. "Are day traders bias free?—evidence from internet stock message boards," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 34(1), pages 96-112, January.
    5. Chang, Chih-Hsiang & Chan, Kam C., 2011. "Investment banks' stock ratings, call warrant issuance, and responses from heterogeneous investors: Evidence from Taiwan," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 733-743, October.
    6. Cowen, Amanda & Groysberg, Boris & Healy, Paul, 2006. "Which types of analyst firms are more optimistic?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 119-146, April.
    7. Sunil Mohanty & Edward Aw, 2006. "Rationality of analysts' earnings forecasts: evidence from dow 30 companies," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(12), pages 915-929.
    8. Rob Brown & Howard Chan & Yew Ho, 2009. "Analysts’ recommendations: from which signal does the market take its lead?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 91-111, August.
    9. Depken II, Craig A. & Zhang, Ying, 2010. "Adverse selection and reputation in a world of cheap talk," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 548-558, November.
    10. Chung, Kee H. & Cho, Seong-Yeon, 2005. "Security analysis and market making," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 114-141, January.
    11. Armen Hovakimian & Ekkachai Saenyasiri, 2014. "US Analyst Regulation and the Earnings Forecast Bias around the World," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(3), pages 435-461, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fma:fmanag:carleton98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Courtney Connors (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.