Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
Jul 27

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
7/27/2006 6:05 AM 

An interesting joint effort on the part of odd bedfellows Business Roundtable and the CFA Institute: a document that urges companies to stop issuing earnings guidance.

It's a document entitled "Breaking the Short-Term Cycle" (catchy, yet accurate) and you can download it here.

I haven't read the entire document yet, but I can't help but agree with their basic principles: companies should stop spoon-feeding "guidance" to analysts and issue hard facts for them to work with - facts about strategies and plans for managing the assets owned by shareholders. Put it in the context of say, Microsoft. Are the interests of the firms' long-term shareholders better served by having their resources directed at a constant spewing of guidance about where this quarter's earnings are headed - or are the long-term investors better served by "guidance" about how the firm plans to meet the challenges of say, web-based software?

The groups' recommendations don't end with simply calling for the end of earnings guidance. They recommend an alignment of "executive compensation with long-term goals and strategies and with long term shareowner interests." (You know, what employee stock options were supposed to do. With the SEC 's new executive compensation disclosures, maybe some progress can be made towards that end. Jury's out for a while on that one.) You could say that that's the same old tired exhortation but they go one big step further: they make some pretty big demands on the institutional investor side to cure "short-termism." They recommend that asset manager compensation be aligned with long-term client interests and to improve disclosure of their incentives, fee structures and personal ownership of funds managed. Fair enough; people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. And when we're talking about handling other people's money, whether it's corporate managers working for shareholders, or professional investors working for clients, glass houses are the only kind permitted by the construction code.

It's hard to see how the issuance of earnings guidance doesn't create a climate of "real men make their earnings forecasts - by any means possible" - including the stretching of judgment to ridiculous lengths in preparing accounting estimates. I think the Business Roundtable and the CFA Institute are on to something here.

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.