Do Analysts Merely Serve as a Conduit for Management's Private Information? Evidence from Their Stock Recommendations Around Regulation Fd

44 Pages Posted: 15 Feb 2005

See all articles by Bin Ke

Bin Ke

National University of Singapore

Yong Yu

University of Texas at Austin

Date Written: March 2005

Abstract

This study uses Reg FD to determine the relative importance of analysts' private information from firm management versus independent research. Using earnings-related closed conference calls as a proxy for the private communication between management and analysts and the informativeness of stock recommendation revisions as a proxy for analysts' total private information, we find the informativeness of analysts' recommendation downgrades but not upgrades issued following the earnings announcement declines significantly from the pre-Reg FD period to the post-Reg FD period for closed conference call firms relative to non-conference call firms. We do not find a similar decline in the recommendation informativeness for open conference call firms relative to non-conference call firms. In addition, the bad news from closed conference calls reflected in downgrades represents only one third of analysts' total private information reflected in downgrades. Our empirical results do not suggest that analysts merely serve as a conduit for management's private information.

JEL Classification: G29, G38, G12

Suggested Citation

Ke, Bin and Yu, Yong, Do Analysts Merely Serve as a Conduit for Management's Private Information? Evidence from Their Stock Recommendations Around Regulation Fd (March 2005). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=667561 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.667561

Bin Ke (Contact Author)

National University of Singapore ( email )

Mochtar Riady Building, BIZ 1, #07-30
15 Kent Ridge Drive
Singapore, 119245
Singapore
+6566013133 (Phone)

Yong Yu

University of Texas at Austin ( email )

1 University Station B6400
Austin, TX 78712
United States
(512)471-6714 (Phone)
(512)471-3904 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
361
Abstract Views
2,557
Rank
152,982
PlumX Metrics