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.

 
 
May 31

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
5/31/2006 6:04 AM 

Yesterday the SEC announced the settlement of charges against Tribune Company, with the firm neither admitting or denying the charges but agreeing to "cease and desist" from such activities in the future.

What activities, you ask?

In 2002 and 2003, Tribune wanted to improve its circulation standing, to attract better-paying advertisers to two of its publications: Newsday and Hoy. Rather than improving circulation by providing content that readers wanted, Tribune made arrangements with news dealers and distribution agents to take papers that they would circulate for free, or not even circulate at all. They'd take back papers as well, but shift the returns into Saturdays, holidays and other days that didn't enter into the analysis of paid circulation by the Circulation Bureau - making their plumped circulation figures look even more valuable to advertisers.

Circulation figures were overstated in 2002 and 2003 for the two papers by 14% to 81%. The sales figures were genuine shams, and had the effect of misstating accounts payable and receivable, as well as revenue and expense figures. The company made misleading presentations to analysts and investors based on the trends presented by the bogus circulation, and ultimately cost the firm $90 million to settle advertisers's claims.

All things are connected, much more than suspected. Tribune ran afoul of the SEC in that the bogus circulation arrangements resulted in filing inaccurate financial statements with the Commission; the firms didn't meet the "accurate books and records" requirements. Whoever dreamed up the bright idea for boosting circulation and ad revenues probably didn't count on that.

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.