Do Expert Informational Intermediaries Add Value? Evidence from Auditors in Microcap Initial Public Offerings

By Joseph P. Weber, Michael Willenborg. 2003

188 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Finance

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/edbc75135816ba7b1c9f68c3dcf51ea2c592cc1c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

1. Jere R. Francis
2. Clive Lennox
3. Christopher S. Armstrong
4. W. Guay
5. Mark L. Defond
6. Asad Kausar
7. Mohammad Alhadab
8. I. Clacher

In Finance

1. Clive Lennox
2. Christopher S. Armstrong
3. Jere R. Francis
4. W. Guay
5. Mark L. Defond
6. Zitian Wang
7. Mohammad Alhadab
8. I. Clacher

Citations in the corpus

• A Cross-Disciplinary Exploration of Entrepreneurship Research (2007, background): “A second stream deals with auditors’ roles in qualifying the firm’s communicated information (Beatty, 1993; Hogan, 1997; Menon & Williams, 1994; Weber & Willenborg, 2003), also usually framed in the context of IPOs.”
• Selection models in accounting research (2012, methodology): “For example, six studies control for company size using the log of total assets (Weber and Willenborg 2003; Chaney et al. 2004; Mansi et al. 2004; Louis 2005; Fortin and Pittman 2007; Choi et al. 2008); three studies use the log of sales rather than assets (Kim et al. 2003; Khurana and Raman 2004;…”
• In Denial? Stock Market Underreaction to Going-concern Audit Report Disclosures (2004, background): “Two related studies are those of Willenborg and McKeown (2001) and Weber and Willenborg (2003) who explore the case of going-concern audit opinions in micro-cap IPOs.”
• The Effect of SOX on Small Auditor Exits and Audit Quality (2011, background): “…Gao et al. (2009) examine whether public companies with market float of $75 million or less manage the size of their float after SOX; Louis (2005) examines acquisition premiums for clients of non-Big 4 auditors; and Weber and Willenborg (2003) examine the audit opinions of ‘‘micro-cap’’ IPOs.”
• The JOBS Act and IPO Volume: Evidence that Disclosure Costs Affect the IPO Decision (2015, background): “As is the case for prestigious underwriters, auditors with higher reputations have been found to provide certification benefits to the IPO (Beatty, 1989; Willenborg, 1999; Weber and Willenborg, 2003).”
• Post-listing performance and private sector regulation: The experience of London's Alternative Investment Market $ (2013, unknown): “While this is an admittedly crude measure of auditor quality, it is consistent with the notion that larger auditors have greater reputational risk and greater resources to conduct a thorough audit (Weber and Willenborg, 2003).”
• The Role of Bank Reputation in “Certifying” Future Performance Implications of Borrowers’ Accounting Numbers (2012, unknown): “run performance implications of reported accounting numbers (Weber and Willenborg, 2003).”