Suchergebnisse

Based on a theoretical perspective of the optimum stimulation level (OSL), we investigate how the cross-media usage (multi-device and multi-app usage) of individual users influences their exploration of new music in a music-streaming platform. We also examine whether gender moderates the link between cross-media usage and new music exploration behavior. We analyze survey responses from 1116 college students in China, and our findings show a significant and positive effect of multi-device usage on new music exploration. By contrast, multi-app usage does not have any statistically significant effect. The results also indicate that being a woman positively moderates the relationship between multi-app usage and new music exploration behavior. Our study contributes to the understanding of exploratory user behavior in a new media context by linking the OSL theory to digital music consumption.

ABSTRACTManuscript Type:EmpiricalResearch Question/Issue:In this study, we examine whether firm value, operating performance, and stock performance of the Canadian firms which have issued restricted voting shares (RVS) is different from comparable non‐RVS firms. We test two competing hypotheses – the controlling shareholder expropriation hypothesis and the investor protection and substitution hypothesis for the Canadian RVS firms.Research Findings/Insights:Based on a ten‐year panel data sample and extensive robustness tests, we do not find that the RVS firms have lower firm value, operating performance, or stock performance than the non‐RVS firms in Canada. There is also no evidence of shareholder value expropriation in key financial decisions, such as mergers and acquisitions and dividend payments. The study does not support the controlling shareholder expropriation hypothesis in the Canadian RVS firms.Theoretical/Academic Implications:The RVS structure has been criticized for lack of shareholder rights protection and risk of value entrenchment in the corporate governance literature. However, the existing empirical evidence is mainly based on the firms in the United States. Using a Canadian sample, we show that these results are a function of corporate governance and regulatory environment and the US results cannot be generalized. We find no evidence of shareholder value appropriation nor do we find differential value or performance implications. We believe that a blanket rejection of RVS structure may not be warranted.Practitioner/Policy Implications:Our study concludes that the RVS structure in Canadian firms is influenced by the nature of these firms and the regulatory environment in Canada that protects minority shareholders from wealth appropriation. Our evidence suggests that policy makers and practitioners should evaluate RVS firms on their individual merit and in individual countries – no generalization is warranted.

AbstractWe address the mixed empirical findings on how corporate governance affects dividend payout policy by analyzing a large sample of firms from 30 countries. Our results indicate that firms with better firm‐level governance pay more dividends, even after controlling for country‐level governance. However, this relation is pronounced only in countries with low shareholder rights. In addition, we find that when the shareholder rights index is high, firm‐level governance is unrelated to dividend payout in the full sample period. Finally, we show that in high‐shareholder‐rights countries, firm‐level governance changes its role from before to after the 2008–2009 financial crisis.

In August 1997, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed brand-specific advertising on television. A simultaneous rise in direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) spending and prescription drug sales has resulted in a heated debate among pharmaceutical firms and medical practitioners, as well as in the U.S. Congress and the popular press. One side claims that DTCA creates demand and higher prices for the advertised brands; the other claims that DTCA increases consumer knowledge. The current study sheds light on the debate with a comparison of consumer welfare before and after the 1997 policy change, using a structural econometric model. The results suggest that DTCA seems to be increasing consumer welfare.

AbstractThe Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE) in China is unique worldwide in requiring disclosure of the timing, participants, and selected content of private in‐house meetings between firm managers and outsider investors. We investigate whether these private meetings benefit hosting firms and their major outside institutional investors—blockholder mutual funds (i.e., funds with ownership ≥5%). Using a large data set of SZSE firms, we find that blockholder mutual funds have more access to private in‐house meetings, and top management is more likely to be present, especially when a meeting is associated with negative news. Furthermore, when blockholder mutual funds attend negative‐news meetings with top management, they are less likely to sell shares, their investment relationship with the hosting firm lasts longer, and hosting firms experience lower postmeeting stock return volatility. These findings suggest that private in‐house meetings are an informative disclosure channel that improves social bonding between top management and blockholder mutual funds in ways that benefit hosting firms.