ࡱ> q @bjbjt+t+ kAA+%]n n n ,  |\t iHj, s"Z""6g8g8g8g+cg7h i$km/i "o"s"""/i/R , CH/R/R/R" p , 6g "6g/Rb/RW2he *g @L`x ?Lf. Profits, losses and the non-linear pricing of Internet stocks Professor John R. M. Hand Tel: (919) 962-3173 Kenan-Flagler Business School Fax: (919) 962-4727 UNC Chapel Hill  HYPERLINK mailto:hand@unc.edu hand@unc.edu Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3490 Abstract This paper sheds light on the economics of Internet firms by extracting information on major value-drivers from their stock prices. Contrary to conventional Wall Street wisdom that there is little or no method in the pricing of Net stocks, I find that basic accounting data are highly value-relevant in a simple nonlinear manner. Using log-linear regression on quarterly data for 167 Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2, I show that Net firms market values are linear and increasing in book equity, but concave and increasing (decreasing) in positive (negative) net income. When Net firms earnings are decomposed into revenues and expenses, revenues are found to be weakly positively priced. In contrast, and consistent with the argument that very large marketing costs are intangible assets, not period expenses, Net firms market values are reliably positive and concave in selling and marketing expenses when net income is negative, particularly during the first two fiscal quarters after the IPO. R&D expenditures are priced in a similarly concave manner, although more durably beyond the IPO than are marketing costs. The concavity in the pricing of core net income, R&D costs, and selling and marketing expenses runs counter to the notion that Net firms are expected to benefit from extraordinary profitability stemming from large strategic operating options, or increasing returns-to-scale. Key words: Internet stocks; non-linear valuation; profits; losses; intangible assets. JEL classifications: G12, G14, M41. First draft: July 30, 1999 This draft: January 10, 2000 (2000 John R. M. Hand. All rights reserved. This work is supported by a KPMG Research Fellowship. My thanks to Barbara Murray and Susie Schoeck for research assistance. The paper has benefited from comments by Professors Blacconiere, Bushman, Erickson, Landsman, Maines, Maydew, Myers, Salamon, Shackelford, Slezak, Smith and Wahlen, and feedback from seminar participants at UC Berkeley, the University of Chicago, Indiana University and UNC Chapel Hill. 1. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the economics of Internet companies, the total market value of which now comfortably exceeds $1.3 trillion dollars versus $50 billion a mere three years ago. I define a Net firm as one that would not exist if it were not for the Internet, and for which 51% or more of its revenues come from or because of the Internet. Due to its rapid and world-wide impact on business and communications, the Internet is seen by many as a revolution akin to that triggered by earlier technological innovations such as moveable type, radio, the telephone, and the computer. The enormous wealth created by Net firms and their spectacular stock returns (see figure 1) have also come to epitomize the high-productivity, high-technology-based nature of the United States so-called New Economy. At the same time, however, the speed with which the Internet is changing the business landscape has preempted structured description or economic analysis of Net firms. Perhaps because of this, many influential but unsubstantiated claims exist about the links between the valuations of Net companies and primitive economic forces. My research aims to separate fact from fiction by quantifying and analyzing key economic characteristics of Net firms operations, and drivers of their stock market valuations. The prevailing view of the pricing of Internet stocks is well illustrated by a recent quote from The Wall Street Journal: Internet stocks, the conventional wisdom goes, are a chaotic mishmash defying any rules of valuation (Wall Street Journal, 12/27/99). Nevertheless, of course, speculations abound. Some assert that conventional metrics such as earnings and book values are irrelevant to the pricing of Net stocks, because non-financial metrics call all the shots. Others claim that revenues are the key driver of Net stock prices. Many analysts and commentators advocate that larger losses create higher market values because they reflect Net firms huge investments in intangible marketing assets. Still others argue that Net stock prices reflect the unique profit opportunities provided by Internet space, such as the increasing returns-to-scale arising from a winner-takes-all business environment, and Net firms abnormally valuable strategic (real) options. I provide evidence on these speculations by extracting information on the major value-drivers of Net firms from their stock prices. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, I find that basic accounting data are highly value-relevant, albeit in a nonlinear manner. Using quarterly data for 167 Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2, I show that Net firms log-transformed market values are neatly linear in both log-transformed book equity and log-transformed net income. Translating the log-log regression results back into their underlying dollar value metric indicates that Net firms market values are linear and increasing in book equity, but concave and increasing (decreasing) in positive (negative) net income. The tenor of the non-linear relations, and the intriguing negative pricing of losses, is not unique to Net firms. I find similar results in two control groups: a random sample of non-Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2, and non-Net firms that went public at the same time as Net firms. I also demonstrate that log-linear regressions yield lower pricing errors for Net stocks than do regressions using per-share or unscaled data. Lower pricing errors are also generally obtained from log-linear regressions than from per-share or unscaled regressions for non-Net firms. When Net firms earnings are decomposed into revenues and expenses, revenues are found to be positively priced, and in a concave manner. In contrast, and consistent with the argument that large marketing costs are intangible assets, not period expenses, Net firms market values are increasing and concave in selling and marketing expenses when net income is negative, particularly during the first two fiscal quarters following the IPO. R&D expenditures are also positively priced in a concave manner, although more durably beyond the IPO than are marketing costs. If accounting data adequately proxy for true economic profitability, then the concavity in the pricing of net income, R&D costs and selling and marketing expenses runs counter to the notion the Net firms are expected to benefit from extraordinary profitability in large strategic options they hold, or increasing returns-to-scale. Such factors would predict convex relations between Net firms market values and their profit drivers. Overall, my findings lead me to conclude that there is a high degree of method in the pricing of Internet stocks: Net firms market values are strongly correlated with accounting data in the logarithmic scale. The remainder of the paper proceeds as follows. Section 2 summarizes the emerging research in accounting and finance about Internet firms. Section 3 details the sources used to obtain the approximate population of publicly traded Net firms, as well as two groups of non-Net firms. Section 4 compares Net and non-Net firms across a variety of past, present and forecasted economic dimensions. Section 5 delineates and tests four common Wall Street conjectures about the links between the market valuations of Net firms and primitive economic forces using an empirical method that is almost entirely new to accounting-based valuation research, namely log-linear regressions. Section 5 also reports the results of tests assessing the robustness of the log-linear regression methods for both Net and non-Net firms. Section 6 concludes. 2. Existing research in accounting and finance on the economics of Internet firms Given the speed with which e-business has arisen, academic accounting and finance research into the economics of the Internet and Net firms has only recently begun to emerge. I briefly discuss the work I am familiar with. Wysocki (1999a) examines the cross-sectional and time-series determinants of message-posting volume on stock message boards on the Web. Wysocki (1999b) uses pre-announcement and announcement period message-posting activity on The Motley Fool stock chat boards to test Kim and Verrecchias (1997) predictions on the relation between trading volume during an earnings announcement and the amount of investor private information prior to and during the earnings announcement. Cooper, Dimitrov and Rau (1999) document a striking mean abnormal stock return of 125% for the ten days surrounding the announcement by a firm that it is changing its name to a Net related .com one. Hand (2000a) examines the proposition that Net firms dramatically underprice their IPOs in order to purchase favorable media exposure. He finds that while underpricing generates future sales, it appears less effective in doing so than conventional selling and marketing expenditures. Hand (2000b) describes the evolution of Net firms profitability and balance sheet ratios, both in calendar time and in event-time relative to their IPOs. He finds that Net firms lack of profitability has its roots in, but is not entirely explained by, their huge investments in intangible marketing brand assets aimed at rapidly seizing a dominant market-share position. Net firms profitability also only weakly improves as they mature beyond their IPO. Hand (2000c) estimates that actual market values of Net stocks are on average several times greater than standard residual income intrinsic valuations. Intrinsic and market values only equate when long-run returns on equity approach 100%. Hand (2000d) uses the log-linear regression method developed in this paper to compare the pricing of Net stocks with that of biotechnology stocks during 1984-1993. He finds a high degree of similarity between the two groups. Finally, Schill and Zhou (1999) compare investors valuations of Internet carve-outs with those of the parent. They find several examples of parents whose value in holdings of carved-out Net subs significantly violate the law-of-one-price by exceeding the market value of the entire parent over an extended period of time. 3. Data and sample selection 3.1 Net firms My approximation to the population of Net firms comes from  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com. This website provides comprehensive information on the Internet industry. The parent company that owns  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com, namely internet.com Corp., is itself publicly traded on the NASDAQ under the ticker INTM. Among the data that  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com does not charge a visitor to its website to view is its InternetStockListTM. Billed by  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com as A Complete List of All Publicly Traded Internet Stocks, it consists of the 50 major Net firms that comprise the more narrow Internet Stock Index (ISDEXTM) also put out by  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com plus a large and steadily increasing number of smaller Internet firms. The ISDEXTM is a widely recognized Internet stock index, being regularly quoted and referred to in financial media such as The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Dow Jones Newswire and CNBC. For a firm to be included in the ISDEXTM,  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com relies primarily on the so-called 51% test, the goal of which is to distinguish firms that would not exist without the Internet. The 51% test requires that 51% or more of a firms revenues must come from or because of the Internet.  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com argues that this separates pure play Net companies from others who may have Net products but which would and do exist without the Net generating a majority of their revenue. Although no minimum market capitalization, trading volume or shares outstanding restrictions are imposed, the Net firms included in the ISDEXTM are frequently the largest and most widely recognized companies in the e-commerce sector.  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com estimates that ISDEXTM represents over 90% of the capitalization of the Internet stock universe on an ongoing basis. Given this background, I approximate the population of Net firms that were publicly traded over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2 by the 271 firms reported on the InternetStockListTM of 11/1/99, plus three firms on earlier listings that were no longer traded (Excite, Geocities and Netscape Communications). Appendix A lists their names and ticker symbols. By defining the Net sector in this way, I attempt to balance the fact that there is no agreed definition of a Net company with the intuitively appealing criteria that  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.com applies to firms to be included in its ISDEXTM, and to a lesser degree, to firms that are permitted into its broader InternetStockListTM. Since there are less stringent definitions of a Net company that would lead to a larger data set, the resulting set of 274 Net firms may underestimate the true number of Net firms over the period examined. 3.2 Non-Net firms I construct two groups of non-Net firms to compare in detail against the 274 Net firms: a random sample of 274 publicly traded non-Net firms (non-Net firms), and a sample of 213 non-Net firms that went public at the same time as Net firms (IPO-matched non-Net firms). The former permits a contrast with the universe of publicly traded firms, while the latter provides a control for time-dependent factors that may affect certain economic characteristics of Net firms. The random sample is chosen from the set of all firms publicly traded on the NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ at 12/31/98 according to the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP). The set of IPO-matched non-Net firms was identified via CRSP,  HYPERLINK http://www.ipomaven.com www.ipomaven.com and  HYPERLINK http://www.ipocentral.com www.ipocentral.com. To be included, the non-Net firm had to go public within a few trading days of its Net firm counterpart. Since Net IPOs tend to bunch together, and a non-Net IPO could be included only once in the non-Net IPO set, it was only possible to obtain a non-Net IPO match for 213 of the 274 Net firms. Appendices B and C list the names and ticker symbols of non-Net firms. 4. Economic comparisons between Net and non-Net firms Tables 1 and 2 report summary statistics on a variety of economic characteristics computed separately for Net and non-Net firms. In each table, statistics are reported for Net firms in panel A, for randomly selected non-Net firms in panel B, and for IPO-matched non-Net firms in panel C. Table 1 compares and contrasts general information, while table 2 focuses on earnings and revenues. With the exception of 1st-day underpricing, data in tables 1 and 2 were recorded from  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com on 12/28/99 using Excels dynamic external Web Query tool. 4.1 General characteristics Table 1 indicates that Net firms are often strikingly different from non-Net firms. For example, panels A and B reveals that as of 12/28/99, the median Net firm had ten times the market capitalization yet employed only 40% the number of people as the median non-Net firm ($865 million vs. $87 million; 169 vs. 417 employees). Relative to the median non-Net firm, the median Net firm also has more than three times the beta risk (2.55 vs. 0.78), one third as much of its stock held by institutions (8% vs. 27%), half as much of its issued shares in public float (31% vs. 62%), a public float turnover that is 6.5 times faster (once every 19 vs. 143 trading days), and five times as much of its public float sold short (5% vs. 1%). The tenor of many of these comparisons holds when Net firms are contrasted with IPO-matched non-Net firms (see panels A vs. C). Notable exceptions are that median Net and IPO-matched non-Net firms have the same analyst stock rating (1.6 vs. 1.6), and contrary to allegations that Net companies deliberately keep their public float low in order to create excess demand, similar percentages of their issued shares in public float (31% vs. 34%). Last but not least, the median Net firm is four times as underpriced at its IPO as the median IPO-matched non-Net firm (37% vs. 9%), with the mean underpricing for Net firms being a whopping 69%. This compares to average underpricing for all U.S. IPOs over the period 1960-1996 of 16% (Ritter, 1998). A marketing explanation for the size of Net firms underpricing is explored in Hand (2000a). 4.2 Earnings and revenues The juxtaposition of the enormous market values of Net firms with their lack of profits has been amply highlighted by the financial press. Table 2 quantifies and compares the profitability of Net and non-Net firms. Table 2 reveals that the past, present and expected future profitability of Net firms is dramatically less than both non-Net firms in general and IPO-matched non-Net firms. Of Net firms, 87% reported a bottom line loss in fiscal 1998, as compared to 32% for non-Net firms in general and 49% for IPO-matched non-Net firms. As of 12/28/99, analysts forecast that Net firms are 4.6 (9.1) times as likely to report a loss in fiscal 1999 (2000) as are typical non-Net firms, and 2.7 (3.2) times as likely to report a loss in fiscal 1999 (2000) as are IPO-matched non-Net firms. While the lack of profitability shown by Net firms is at odds with that of non-Net firms, it is not unique historically. Amir and Lev (1996) report that for the 40 quarters beginning 1984:Q1 and ending 1993:Q4, 69% of reported quarterly EPS of the 14 independent cellular telephone companies they examine were negative. They also report that the corresponding figure for 44 biotechnology companies over the same period was 72%. This compares to 77% of Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2 reporting negative EPS, suggesting that Net firms may be no more unprofitable than have been other groups of firms in earlier technology-based, high-growth industries. Running partially counter to the dismal picture of Net firms current profitability are analysts forecasts that the median Net firm will enjoy an earnings growth rate of 50% over the next five years (long-term growth rate in EPS). This compares to 16% for non-Net firms and 30% for IPO-matched non-Net firms. Such favorable expectations for the long-term profitability of Net firms may stem in part from the dramatically higher revenue growth rates that Net firms have experienced. The median Net firms most recent 1-year and 3-year annual revenue growth rates are close to ten times those of non-Net firms in general, and two to three times those of IPO-matched non-Net firms. However, there is also more uncertainty about Net firms long-term EPS growth rates: the median standard deviation of analysts forecasts of Net firms long-term EPS growth rates is 14% versus only 3% for non-Net firms in general and 5% for IPO-matched non-Net firms. 5. The value-drivers of Internet stock prices Given the dramatic financial differences between Net and non-Net firms and the speed with which the Internet has impacted business, it is perhaps not surprising that many influential yet conflicting speculations (hypotheses) have arisen from analysts or the financial press about the links, or lack thereof, between the stock market valuations of Net companies and economic primitives. By subjecting four of the most prominent to empirical scrutiny, I aim to separate fact from fiction regarding how the market does, and how the market does not, price Net stocks. I begin by describing each hypothesis (sections 5.1 5.4) as well as illustrating it via a quote from the financial press. I then develop one or more predictions that reasonably stem from each hypothesis. The predictions are tested after providing a detailed explanation of the log-linear regression method, given that it is almost entirely new to valuation-related capital markets research. 5.1 Hypothesis H1 The value-irrelevance (relevance) of accounting (non-financial) data The first hypothesis I examine is that conventional accounting-based measures of firm value or performance, such as book value and earnings, are irrelevant in explaining the equity market values of Net firms. The following quote illustrates this view, which from my reading of the financial press is widely held on Wall Street: The most important of the rules, the one from which all the other laws of this parallel universe spring [that of Internet stocks] is this: Internet stocks arent like other stocks...[F]or most companies there are at least some widely agreed upon yardsticks: book value, current earnings, projected earnings growth. Internet companies have no tangible assetslittle or nothing in the way of earnings, and their future growth is impossible to predict reliably. So investors cant use their customary yardsticks. [Net stock rules: Masters of a parallel universe, Fortune, 6/7/99] This perspective predicts that accounting data will explain at best a trivial fraction of the cross-sectional variation in equity market values. While such impotence would be unsurprising to financial professionals, it would run counter to almost all the academic theory and evidence compiled in accounting-based equity valuation research over the past ten years. In contrast to skepticism about the value-relevance of accounting data, analysts place great emphasis on the role of non-accounting information and/or unconventional metrics in setting and moving Net stock prices, such as page views, click-through rates, or unique visitors. For example, Steve Harmon, a leading Net analyst who now heads his own investment management firm  HYPERLINK http://www.e-harmon.com, www.e-harmon.com, readily admits that: (He) never had to capitulate on valuations. Thats because he had decided from the very beginning that using the valuation metrics of the past for Internet stocks made no sense. So he decided to invent some metrics that he could apply ... [Do you believe? How Yahoo! became a blue chip, Fortune, 6/7/99] Evidence that non-financial information can explain stock prices better can accounting data, but only in very special circumstance, is proposed by Amir and Lev (1996). Amir and Lev examined the value-relevance of financial and non-financial information for independent cellular telephone companies over period 19841993. They concluded that on a stand-alone basis, book values, earnings and cash flows were largely irrelevant to cellular telephone companies stock prices. Whether Net firms represent another special circumstance is an open empirical question. 5.2 Hypothesis H2 Revenues are the primary driver of Net stock prices The second hypothesis that I test is the often-voiced conjecture that revenues drive the pricing of New stocks. The following quotes illustrate this view: Whats the best way to compare valuations of Internet stocks? One measure has gained more or less universal acceptance: the ratio of stock price to annualized sales, or revenue per share. The popularity of the price/sales ratio reflects investor belief that its more important for Internet companies to grow revenue than profit, and that revenue is proxy for marketplace acceptance and market share. [Parsing the price-to-sales ratio, Herring Investor, 990310] But with so many Internet stocks having achieved medium- and large-cap status despite heavy losses, its pretty clear that investors are now paying lots of attention to top line trends. After all, with net stocks, Price-to-Sales ratios are often the only readily obtainable quantitative valuation metrics one can examine. [Sales growth leaders, Marketguide.com, 991116] The use of revenues is typically justified by the observation that it involves that rarest of commodities in Internet valuationhard numbers (Wooley, 1999) and that most Net firms report losses, not profits, making intrinsic valuation and the setting of price targets based on price-earnings ratios nonsensical. At the same time, those who advocate the centrality of revenues generally concede that it doesnt tell you if a stock is cheap or expensive by itself, but whether its cheap or expensive compared to its peers (e.g., Gerstein, 1999; Wooley, 1999). If the view that revenues are the primary driver of a Net firms stock price is correct, then revenues will be positively related to market value. Furthermore, revenues should dominate by explaining more of the cross-sectional variation in the pricing of Net stocks than any other variable. 5.3 Hypothesis H3 Larger losses enhance, not reduce, Net firms market values The third claim that is commonly made about the markets pricing of Net stocks is that larger losses translate into higher, not lower, stock prices. The following quote typifies this view: Profits matter. Or do they? The attitude is almost antiprofit, marvels Mr. Borkowski of Industrial Microwave Systems, Inc. He says that his two-year old company originally planned to become profitable in the year 2000. But our financial advisers told us not to be profitable too quickly, he says....One of the sacred tenets of businessyou have to make moneysuddenly looks almost like a quaint artifact of an outdated era....Venture capitalists often think a company is wimpy if it turns a profit too quickly....In this marketplace, the more money you lose, the more valuable you are. [Rethinking a quaint idea: Profits, The Wall Street Journal, 5/19/99] Behind this view is the plausible economic argument that losses incurred by Internet companies reflect strategic expenditures by management, not poor operating performance. In particular, it is common knowledge that management of Net firms make huge investments in intangible marketing assets in order to more quickly capture market share, because they believe that such investments will yield large abnormally large profits sometime in the future. For example: While Internet companies are using a variety of ploys to become the market leader, heavy spending on marketing seems to be the real key to achieving dominance. [Whos getting more bang for the marketing buck, Business Week, 5/31/99] For five quarters running, CNET Inc. has done what few Internet companies have done: shown a profit. But now Chairman and Chief Executive Halsey M. Minor is chucking his conservative, money-making approach. On June 30, Minor announced that he will plunge into the red with a $100 million ad campaign aimed at making CNETs name as synonymous with technology as ESPN is with sports. Says Minor: This is a bold play for a dominant position. In putting growth ahead of profit, Minor hopes to emulate the success of other Web companies such as Amazon.com Inc. The online retailer is one of the top companies in cyberspace and the darling of investors even though it wont make a dime until 2001 at the earliest. [CNET goes for broke, Business Week, 7/12/99] If this view is correct, then contrary to hypothesis H1, accounting data is somewhat value-relevant since the market value of a Net firm depends on the sign of its net income. In the context of cross-sectional regressions of the market values of Net firms equity on their accounting data, several testable predictions arise. First, when net income is negative, it should be negatively priced. Since prior research suggests that losses of non-Net firms are accorded a zero multiple in valuation (Collins, Pincus and Xie, 1999), finding a negative multiple on losses for Net firms would be novel. Second, loss-making Net firms will spend more on intangible assets such as selling and marketing, and research and development, than will profitable Net firms. Third, if net income is broken into revenue and expenses, the stock markets pricing of selling and marketing expenses will be positive when net income is negative. Prior research has not examined the pricing of selling and marketing expenses (probably because unlike Net firms, non-Net firms rarely break selling and/or marketing expenses separately out of SG&A in their income statements). It is known, however, that R&D expenditures tend to be priced as assets, not period expenses (Lev and Sougiannis, 1996). 5.4 Hypothesis H4 Net stock prices reflect abnormally high expected future profitability Several authors have proposed that Net firms stock prices reflect expectations of two kinds of special profit opportunities: strategic operating options and increasing-returns-to-scale. Mauboussin (1999) and Yee (1999) argue that firms hold unusually valuable portfolios of strategic (real) options that may account for the enormous differences between actual equity market values and intrinsic values estimated from basic discounted cash flow models. Since real options induce convexity in the relation between equity value and drivers of economic profits (Yee, 1999; Zhang, 1999), this view reasonably predicts that Net firms market values will be convex in accounting proxies for the drivers of economic profits, such as book equity and net income. Moreover, Zhang (1999) notes that convexity is most pronounced for high-growth firms. Table 2 indicates that Net firms enjoy huge growth rates, leading to the expectation that it exists, convexity in the relation between equity market values and accounting data will be particularly pronounced for Net firms. The second special profit opportunity that may exist for Net firms is the increasing returns-to-scale alleged to accrue from the winner-takes-all business model that many Net firms adhere to (Ip, 1999). According to this view, the value of a Net-based business grows exponentially as a function of the number of its customers because revenues grow disproportionately faster than expenses or the underlying capital employed. Since the past and present costs of attracting customers are reflected in the firms book equity and net income, these financial statement variables are expected to be related to equity market value in a convex manner. 5.5 The log-linear OLS regression method I test the predictions developed in sections 5.1 5.4 using pooled time-series cross-sectional log-linear regressions, with calendar quarter fixed-effects dummies to control for secular trends in Net firms average market values. Each dependent or independent variable Z is log-transformed by: LZ = loge[Z + 1] if Z ( 0, but loge[Z + 1] if Z < 0 (where Z is expressed in $ millions) (1) This transformation is information-preserving in the sense of being monotone and one-to-one. The addition of $1 million to Z ensures that LZ is defined when Z is at or close to zero. For illustrative purposes, if X and Y are both non-negative, then the general non-stochastic linear relation between the log-transformed values of X and Y is given by loge(Y + 1) = ( + ( loge(X + 1) ( LY = ( + ( LX (2) Equation (2) implies that the unscaled or anti-logged relation between X and Y is Y = e( (X + 1)( 1 (3) An appealing feature of the log-transformed model is that the degree and type of non-linearity in the relation between X and Y is captured by the parameter (. For non-negative values of X, the relation between X and Y in equation (3) is concave if 0 < ( < 1, linear if ( = 1, and convex if ( > 1. When X is negative but log-transformed per equation (1), the relation between X and Y is concave if 1 < ( < 0, linear if ( = 1, and convex if ( < 1. If ( = 0, then X and Y are unrelated no matter what the sign of X. If loge(Y + 1) is a linear function of more than one logged independent variable, say X and W, then ( reflects the marginal concavity, linearity or convexity of X (that is, the concavity, linearity or convexity of X holding constant W). The past ten years have seen a surge in the theoretical development and empirical testing of accounting-based valuation models in which equity market value is a linear function of book equity and current and/or expected future net income (see Ohlson 1995, 1999; Feltham and Ohlson 1995, 1996; Barth, Beaver and Landsman 1998; Dechow, Hutton and Sloan 1999; Frankel and Lee 1998; Hand and Landsman 1999; Harris and Kemsley 1999; and Lee, Myers and Swaminathan 1999). Estimation of these linear models has been through OLS applied either to undeflated dollar values; deflated data where the most common deflators are the number of shares outstanding, book equity and total assets; and in returns rather than in levels. The only studies that use log-linear regression in an accounting-based valuation setting are Ye (1998) and Ye and Finn (1999). Ye and Finn (1999) motivate their log-linear model of firms equity market values, book equity and net income in two major ways. First, they argue that the assumption made by Ohlson (1995) that the dollar value of abnormal earnings follows an AR(1) decay process leads to the unpalatable conclusion that the long-run abnormal return on equity is negative. Second, they demonstrate that if instead the log of one plus the return on equity follows an AR(1) process, and net dividends are zero, then equity market value emerges as a multiplicative function of book equity and net income. Taking logs of all variables leads to a log-linear relation between equity market value, book equity and net income. Ye and Finns model is summarized in Appendix D. In addition to the motivation provided by Ye and Finn (1999) and the flexibility log-linear models provide in accomodating concavity, linearity or convexity, I center my empirical analysis on log-linear OLS regressions for two econometric reasons. First, log-linear regressions typically reduce the influence of anomalous or outlier observations in financial data. Second, log-linear regressions typically achieve greater homoscedasticity in regression residuals. These are significant concerns for Net firms because of the high degree of skewness observed in Net firms equity market values, net income, book equity, etc. (see table 2). To finesse the reasonable concern that a minority of the data drives the magnitude and/or significance of parameter estimates, most researchers who apply OLS regression to non-logged data first identify and then winsorize or delete outliers. This potentially ad-hoc process is all but unnecessary with logged data because the log transform dramatically dampens the values of previously extreme observations. Figure 2 illustrates the specification benefits for Net firms of log-transformed data by scatter plotting the univariate relations between Net firms equity market values, pre-income book equity and core quarterly net income. Panels A and B plot raw, undeflated data; panels C and D plot per-share data; and panels E and F plot logged data. Pre-income book equity is defined as book equity at the end of the fiscal quarter less net income earned over the quarter. I use this definition instead of the more conventional book equity at the end of the quarter because it facilitates the computation of the marginal impact of book equity and net income on equity market value in regressions where book equity and net income are both included as independent variables. Core net income is defined as net income less special items in order to filter out one-time distortions in profitability. Inspection of panels AD suggests that undeflated and per-share data are highly skewed and heteroscedastic, making it difficult to determine if the relations between market value and pre-income book equity and/or market value and core net income are linear or non-linear. In striking contrast, panels E and F indicate that the relations between logged market value and logged pre-income book equity and log-transformed core net income appear both linear and homoscedastic, conditional on the sign of core net income. The log transform uncovers three empirical regularities obscured in panels AD. First, the relation between logged market value and logged pre-income book equity is positive and strong. Second, the relation between logged market value and log-transformed core net income is positive when core net income is positive, but negative when core net income is negative. Third, the fact that the relations between equity market value and core net income are linear when the underlying unscaled data are log-transformed suggests that the relations between unscaled equity market value and unscaled core net income are not linear. Applying OLS to unscaled data would therefore be likely to yield significant violations of the assumptions of OLS; mis-estimation of the signs, magnitudes and significance of model parameters; and faulty economic inferences based on them. Similar concerns exist for per-share regressions. 5.6 Descriptive statistics Panel F of figure 2 points to asymmetry in the signs of the relations between Net firms market values and core net income. Table 4 therefore compares the means and medians of key economic variables and ratios for the Net firms used in regressions across positive versus negative quarterly core net income. To be included in the regressions, a Net firm had to be traded at the end of one or more fiscal quarters during the period 2/1/97 and 7/30/99 (hereafter, 1997:Q11999:Q2), and have positive pre-income book equity and non-zero core net income for that quarter. One hundred sixty-seven Net firms covering 729 firm-quarters of data satisfied these criteria. Of firm-quarters, 77% were unprofitable and 23% were profitable. Full variable definitions are given in table 3. All data except selling and marketing expenses were taken from quarterly Compustat. Selling and marketing expenses were hand-collected by searching Net firms 10-Qs via  HYPERLINK http://www.sec.gov www.sec.gov. Table 4 indicates that relative to their profitable counterparts, loss-making Net firms have reliably smaller mean and median dollar market values, book equity, revenues, spending on R&D, and selling and marketing expenses. However, loss-making Net firms enjoy significantly larger mean and median price-to-sales ratios, and spend a greater fraction of their revenues on R&D and selling and marketing. 5.7 Regression results The results of estimating log-linear OLS regression models testing the predictions from hypotheses H1H4 are reported in panel B of tables 5 and 6. Pearson correlations among the dependent and independent variables are shown in panel A of each table. The correlations and regressions in table 5 use only firm-quarters in which core net income is positive, while those in table 6 use only firm-quarters in which core net income is negative. The correlations and regressions reported in tables 5 and 6 include several noteworthy results. First, when core net income is positive, the Pearson correlations between log-transformed equity market values and log-transformed accounting data, and among different kinds of log-transformed accounting data, are uniformly positive and large (panel A of table 5). This confirms the visual indications provided in panels E and F of figure 2 of the value-relevance of accounting data for Net firms. However, the high multi-collinearity among accounting data warn that it may be difficult to reliably estimate partial correlations between market value and multiple accounting variables. Correlations are also high when core net income is negative (panel A of table 6), but in every case smaller in absolute magnitude than the correlations when core net income is positive. Second, the regressions firmly reject hypothesis H1 that conventional accounting measures of firm value or performance are irrelevant when explaining the equity market values of Net firms. Incremental to the adjusted-R2 explained by the calendar quarter dummies, the log-transformed values of pre-income book equity and core net income explain 76% (table 5) and 46% (table 6) of the cross-sectional variation in the log-transformed market values of Net firms over the ten quarter window 1997:Q11999:Q2. When net income is broken into revenues and four key expenses, the cross-sectional variation explained by accounting data rises to 85% (= 83% + 2%, see table 5) and 64% (= 78% 14%, see table 6). These percentages indicate that the cross-sectional variation in log-transformed equity market values of Net firms that is available to be uniquely explained by non-financial data is quite low15% in table 5 and 36% in table 6. The strength of basic accounting data and the lack of room it leaves for non-financial data thus runs opposite to the claims of many analysts that non-financial information is the central factor in the pricing of Net stocks. The third finding I highlight is that the regressions reject hypothesis H2 that revenues dominate the pricing of Net stocks. While the univariate correlations between log-transformed revenues and market values are hugely positive, the partial correlations after controlling for pre-income book equity and total expenses are only marginally positive. The average t-statistic on logged revenue after controlling for logged pre-income book equity is 2.2 in table 5 and 1.4 in table 6. In contrast, the partial correlations of pre-income book equity after controlling for core net income or revenues and total expenses are much stronger, with the average t-statistic on logged pre-income book equity being 7.8 in table 5 and 17.8 in table 6. The fourth result of note is that the regressions strongly support hypothesis H3. For Net firms, larger losses cross-sectionally correlate with higher, not lower, market values. Whereas the estimated elasticity coefficient on log-transformed positive core net income after controlling for pre-income book equity is a significantly positive 0.31 (t-statistic = 3.6, n = 165), the estimated elasticity on log-transformed negative core net income is 0.29 (t-statistic = 5.4, n = 564). Slope coefficients in log-linear models are elasticities, measuring the percentage change in the dependent variable associated with a one percent change in the corresponding independent variable, holding constant all other variables. Thus, the coefficient of 0.31 on positive core net income indicates that for those firm-quarters, a one percent increase in net income cross-sectionally led to an 0.31% percent increase in equity market value, all else held constant. In contrast, the coefficient of 0.29 on negative core net income indicates that for those firm-quarters, a one percent more negative net income led in the cross-section to a 0.29% increase in equity market value, all else held constant. Fifth, the negative pricing of losses is plausibly explained by the solid indications in tables 4, 5 and 6 that large marketing and R&D costs are viewed by the market as intangible assets, not period expenses. The final regressions in panel B of tables 5 and 6 are based on replacing total expenses with its four major components prior to being log-transformed: cost of goods sold, general and administrative expenses, R&D costs, and selling and marketing expenses. Consistent with hypothesis H3, the regressions reveal that when core net income is negative, the elasticity of selling and marketing expenses is 0.29 (t-statistic = 3.2). When core net income is positive, the elasticity is a mere 0.05 (t-statistic = 0.2). Since panels A versus B of table 4 show that selling and marketing expenses are much larger as a fraction of revenues when core net income is negative than when core net income is positive, these regression results indicate that when marketing costs are large enough to lead to reported losses, they are viewed by the market as intangible assets, not period expenses. Period expenses would be expected to be negatively priced. Similar results exist for the elasticities on R&D costs. Contrary to their immediate expensing under GAAP, large R&D costs are also priced by the market as if they are intangible assets, not period expenses. The elasticity on R&D when core net income is negative is a reliably negative 0.23 (t-statistic = 4.3). When core net income is positive, the elasticity on R&D is a tiny 0.01 (t-statistic < 0.1) The sixth result of note is that the pricing of R&D costs and selling and marketing expenses is increasing and concave when core net income is negative. Recall from section 5.5 that for non-negative pre-logged values of an independent variable X, the relation between X and a dependent variable Y is concave if 0 < ( < 1, linear if ( = 1, and convex if ( > 1. When X is negative but log-transformed per equation (1), the relation between X and Y is concave if 1 < ( < 0, linear if ( = 1, and convex if ( < 1. If ( = 0, then X and Y are unrelated no matter what the sign of X. The t-statistic on the coefficient estimate of 0.23 on log-transformed R&D in panel B of table 6 with respect to the null value of +1 required for linearity is 14.5. The t-statistic on the coefficient estimate of 0.29 on log-transformed selling and marketing expenses with respect to +1 is 7.9. Determining whether pre-income book equity or core net income is concave, linear or convex is trickier. Three of the four univariate coefficients on pre-income book equity and core net income in tables 5 and 6 are reliably greater than +1, indicating convexity. However, when both log-transformed pre-income book equity and core net income are independent variables, equity market value is increasing and concave in positive core net income, but decreasing and concave in negative core net income. The t-statistic on the coefficient estimate of 0.31 on log-transformed positive core net income in panel B of table 5 with respect to the linearity null value of +1 is 8.0. The t-statistic on the coefficient estimate of 0.29 on log-transformed negative core net income in panel B of table 6 with respect to the null value of 1 required for linearity is 13.4. Contrasting with the asymmetric sign in the relation between equity market value and core net income, Net firms market values are always reliably positive in pre-income book equity. When both pre-income book equity and core net income are independent variables, the relation is a linear one; the t-statistics on pre-income book equity with respect to the null values required for linearity are 0.8 and 1.2, respectively. However, the marginal relation between pre-income book equity and market value becomes concave as net income is decomposed into revenues and key expenses. The elasticities on pre-income book equity in the last regression in panel B of tables 5 and 6 are 0.74 and 0.66, respectively. While these are reliably positive (t-statistics are 5.6 and 14.8, respectively), they are also reliably different from the null values of +1 required for linearity (t-statistics are 2.0 and 7.7, respectively). In general, therefore, the elasticities estimated on pre-income book equity, core net income, R&D costs, and selling and marketing expenses are inconsistent with hypothesis H4, which predicts that Net firms market values will be convex in accounting proxies for economic profit drivers. Concavities are uniformly observed when the detail in net income is exploited, suggesting that Net firms stock prices do not reflect expectations of large value from real (strategic) options or increasing-returns-to-scale. This is despite the fact that Net firms enjoy huge growth rates, and should therefore experience particularly pronounced convexity. It is particularly noteworthy that table 6 points to intangible assets (R&D costs, and selling and marketing expenses) being sharply concave, since Net firms R&D and selling and marketing expenses are the economic primitives that would be most likely to generate large real operating options. Finally, the intercepts in all regressions are reliably positive. From equation (3), the intercept in the log-linear model is a scaling factor. A zero intercept translates into a neutral (unit) scaling factor, while an intercept of ( ( 0 translates into a scaling factor of e(. The intercept in the final regression of panel B of table 5 equates to a scaling factor of e1.42 = 4.1, while that in the final regression of panel B of table 6 equates to a scaling factor of e1.73 = 5.6. One interpretation of the large positive intercepts is that the regressions are mis-specified in the sense that one or more valid economic variables that explain Net firms stock prices have been omitted. Another interpretation is that the implied scaling factors estimate the degree to which Net stocks are overpriced. Under this interpretation, the intercept in the last regressions of panel B in tables 5 and 6 imply that on average profitable Net stocks are overpriced by 318% (= e1.43 1, expressed as a percentage), while loss-making Net stocks are overpriced by 464% (= e1.73 1, expressed as a percentage). 5.8 Robustness tests Tables 7, 8 and 9 conclude my empirical analysis by reporting the results of tests that examine the robustness of the results in tables 5 and 6 as Net firms mature beyond their IPO, and the robustness of the log-linear regression method across two groups of non-Net firms. 5.8.1 Determinants of Net firms equity values before, at and after their IPOs Table 7 provides more refined evidence on the pricing of Net firms net income, revenues and expenses by log-transformed equity market values on accounting data in event-time relative to the quarter in which the Net firm had its IPO. I undertake such regressions to determine whether the findings reported in tables 5 and 6 are pervasive as Net firms mature, or limited to particular quarters before, at or after going public. The land-grab view of e-commerce would suggest that intangible assets such as R&D and marketing expenses are most valuable at and immediately after the firm goes public. For reasons of sample size, the analysis is limited to firm-quarters in which core net income is negative. This is a subset of the observations used in table 6 because some Net firms went public prior to 1997:Q1. Table 7 restricts the independent variables to pre-income book equity and core net income. Table 8 breaks core net income into similar revenue and expense components to tables 5 and 6, except that pre-logged cost of goods sold and general and administrative expenses are added together into one variable for simplicity. I highlight five results. First, table 7 indicates that at all but one point in time (Q+1), equity value is linear and increasing in pre-income book equity. Second, despite the relatively low number of observations, negative core net income is reliably negatively priced at the one-tailed level in eight out of eleven regressions. Third, neither set of coefficients nor the intercept systematically increases or decreases over event time. Fourth, table 8 indicates that revenues become reliably positively priced as the Net firm gets further from its IPO. In contrast, however, selling and marketing expenses are reliably positively priced before, at and during the first two quarters after the IPO, but not thereafter. Taken together, the results on revenues and selling and marketing expenses suggest that they may act as substitutes in the markets assessment of the present value of future cash flows to the firm. Fifth, R&D costs are robustly positively priced over virtually the entire event window in table 8. 5.8.2 Log-linear analysis of the equity market values of non-Net firms The strong and robust results reported in tables 5 8 suggest that the log-linear model is well-specified for Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2. In this section, I examine competing specifications for the relation between equity market value for Net firms, as well as subjecting non-Net firms to log-linear and conventional specification tests. Table 9 compares and contrasts the results of estimating the relation between equity market values and pre-income book equity and core net income across three groups of firms and three data metrics, separately for positive and negative core net income. The results for Net firms are reported in table A; for a random sample of non-Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2 in panel B; and for non-Net firms that went public at the same time as Net firms in panel C. The data metrics are the log-transformed approach described in detail in previous sections of this paper, per-share data, and raw, unscaled data. It is dangerous to compare adjusted R2 statistics across different data metrics (Brown, Lo and Lys, 1999; Ye, 1998). To determine which data metric yields the best empirical fit, I therefore use goodness-of-fit measures that are invariant across the data metric used in the regressions. These are the mean and median absolute relative pricing error (RPE) and the mean and median absolute symmetrized relative pricing error (SRPE). For a given firm, RPE and SRPE are defined by:  EMBED Equation.3 ,  EMBED Equation.3  EMBED Equation.3  (4) where Mi is the actual dollar equity market value of firm i, and EMBED Equation.3  is the equity market value fitted from (predicted by) the regression. Both RPE and SRPE are relative measures, not contaminated by scaling factors associated with measurement units. I report statistics for both relative and symmetrized relative pricing errors because the simple relative pricing error weights overpricing more than underpricing (implying that a model that overprices stocks would appear to provide a better fit than one that underprices). The symmetrized absolute relative pricing error corrects this concern in the sense that underpricing by 50% yields an SRPE of the same size as overpricing by 100%. Finally, for each regression I report the percentage of fitted equity market values that are negative. A good data metric should not yield negative predicted prices. The regressions in table 9 include several noteworthy findings. First, panel A demonstrates that the log-linear model yields superior goodness-of-fit measures for both positive and negative core net income firm-quarters than either the per-share or unscaled data metrics. For Net firms, the log-linear model has the lowest mean and median RPE, the lowest mean and median SRPE, and never predicts negative equity market values. The per-share data metric comes in second, while the unscaled data metric is a distant third. In terms of parameter inferences, the per-share metric yields an insignificant coefficient on pre-income book equity when core net income is positive, and a marginally negative coefficient on core net income when core net income is negative. One interpretation of these differences is that per-share regressions can lead to faulty economic inferences in the presence of significant non-linearities. The second observation I note is that panel B shows that the log-linear model yields superior goodness-of-fit measures than per-share or unscaled data metrics when the competing models are estimated for a random sample of non-Net firms over 1997:Q11999:Q2. Panel C reveals that the only sample for which the log-linear model provides less than the best fit is for IPO-matched non-Net firms when core net income is positive. Third, focusing on the log-linear model across panels A C, it can be seen that while pre-income book equity and core net income are uniformly positively priced when core net income is negative, core net income is always negatively priced when net income is negative. Moreover, the elasticity of negative core net income appears remarkably stable (0.29 in panel A, 0.35 in panel B, and 0.34 in panel C). All else held equal, the losses of Net and non-Net firms are priced very similarly. Fourth, like those on Net firms, the intercepts on the log-linear model for non-Net firms are strongly positive and of similar magnitude to non-Net firms. Taken at face value, this may imply that both Net and non-Net firms are overpriced, and by proportionately similar degrees. Finally, the elasticity of pre-income book equity is always greatest for Net firms, regardless of the sign of core net income. To the extent that real options exert a convex force on the relation between pre-income book equity and equity market value, this finding may indicate that Net firms are judged by the market to have more valuable real options than are non-Net firms. 6. Conclusions This paper has attempted to separate Internet fact from fiction by quantifying and analyzing key economic characteristics of Net firms operations, and drivers of their stock market valuations. My method was to extract information on major value-drivers from Net firms stock prices. Contrary to conventional Wall Street wisdom that there is little or no method in the pricing of Net stocks, I found that basic accounting data are highly value-relevant in a simple nonlinear manner. Using log-linear regression on quarterly data for 167 Net firms over the period 1997:Q11999:Q2, I showed that Net firms market values are linear and increasing in book equity, but concave and increasing (decreasing) in positive (negative) net income. I also show that the negative pricing of losses is robust and of a similar elasticity across Net and non-Net firms. When Net firms earnings are decomposed into revenues and expenses, revenues are found to be weakly positively priced. In contrast, and consistent with the argument that very large marketing costs are intangible assets, not period expenses, Net firms market values are reliably positive and concave in selling and marketing expenses when net income is negative, particularly during the first two fiscal quarters after the IPO. R&D expenditures are priced in a similarly concave manner, although more durably beyond the IPO than are marketing costs. The concavity in the pricing of core net income, R&D costs, and selling and marketing expenses runs counter to the notion the Net firms are expected to benefit from extraordinary profitability stemming from large strategic operating options, or increasing returns-to-scale. Finally, it must be stressed that a critical question that cannot be confidently answered by cross-sectional regressions of equity market value on current accounting data is whether the correlations extracted from Net firms stock prices are fully rational. Providing a rigorous answer to that question a burning one in the minds of millions of investors around the world requires constructing intrinsic value estimates that are independent of observed prices. I pursue such an analysis in another paper (Hand 2000c). What can be said, however, is conventional wisdom that asserts that the pricing of Net stocks is a chaotic mishmash defying any rules of valuation (Wall Street Journal, 12/27/99) is false. As with Polonious comment on Hamlets strange behavior, Though this be madness, yet there is method in t. Appendix A List of names and tickers for the 274 Net firms used in this study 11-800-FLOWERS.COMFLWS2@HomeATHM3@plan.incAPLN424/7 MediaTFSM5About.comBOUT6AboveNet CommunicationsABOV7Accrue SoftwareACRU8AdForceADFC9Agile SoftwareAGIL10AllaireALLR11Alloy OnlineALOY12Alteon WebSystemsATON13Amazon.comAMZN14America OnlineAOL15Ameritrade HoldingAMTD16AppliedTheoryATHY17AppNet SystemsAPNT18AribaARBA19Art Technology GroupARTG20Ashford.comASFD21Ask JeevesASKJ22AudibleADBL23audiohighway.comAHWY24Autobytel.comABTL25Autoweb.comAWEB26AXENT TechnologiesAXNT27BackWeb TechnologiesBWEB28bamboo.comBAMB29barnesandnoble.comBNBN30Beyond.comBYND31BigStar EntertainmentBGST32BiznessOnline.comBIZZ33BlueflyBFLY34Bluestone SoftwareBLSW35Bottomline TechnologiesEPAY36Braun ConsultingBRNC37Broadbase SoftwareBBSW38broadcast.comBCST39BroadcomBRCM40BroadVisionBVSN41C/NETCNET42CAIS InternetCAIS43CareerBuilderCBDR44CDnowCDNW45Cheap TicketsCTIX46Checkpoint SoftwareCHKP47Chemdex CorporationCMDX48China.comCHINA49Cisco SystemsCSCO50Claimsnet.comCLAI51ClarentCLRN52CMGICMGI53The Cobalt GroupCBLT54Commerce OneCMRC55CommTouch SoftwareCTCH56COMPS.COMCDOT57Concentric NetworkCNCX58ConnectInc.comCNKT59Convergent CommunicationsCONV60Covad CommunicationsCOVD61Critical PathCPTH62Crosswalk.ComAMEN63CyberCashCYCH64CybergoldCGLD65Cyberian OutpostCOOL66Cyber Merchants ExchangeCMEE67CyberShop.comCYSP68CyberSource.comCYBS69CylinkCYLK70DigexDIGX71Digital InsightDGIN72Digital IslandISLD73Digital LavaDGV74Digital RiverDRIV75DLJdirectDIR76DoubleClickDCLK77drkoop.comKOOP78drugstore.comDSCM79E*TRADE GroupEGRP80EarthLink NetworkELNK81EarthWebEWBX82eBayEBAY83EDGAR OnlineEDGR84eFax / jetfaxEFAX85eGain CommunicationsEGAN86Egghead.comEGGS87E-Loan.comEELN88Engage TechnologiesENGA89Entrust TechnologiesENTU90E.piphanyEPNY91eToysETYS92ExciteXCIT93Exodus CommunicationsEXDS94F5 NetworksFFIV95fashionmall.comFASH96FatBrain.comFATB97fine.com InternationalFDOT98FlashNet CommunicationsFLAS99Flycast CommunicationsFCST100foreignTV.comFNTV101Freeserve plcFREE102FreeShop.comFSHP103Frontline CommunicationsFCCN104ftd.comEFTD105FundtechFNDT106FVC.COMFVCX107Garden.comGDEN108GenesisIntermedia.comGENI109GeocitiesGCTY110Go2NetGNET111GoTo.comGOTO112HeadHunter.NETHHNT113HealtheonHLTH114High Speed AccessHSAC115HomeCom CommunicationsHCOM116Homestore.comHOMS117Hoover's Inc.HOOV118HotJobs.comHOTJ119Internet Capital GroupICGE120IDTIDTC121ImageX.comIMGX122InfonauticsINFO123InfoseekSEEK124InfoSpace.comINSP125InktomiINKT126InsWebINSW127Intelligent LifeILIF128Interactive PicturesIPIX129InterliantINIT130Internet AmericaGEEK131Internet Financial ServicesIFSX132internet.comINTM133Internet Initiative JapanIIJI134InterVUITVU135InterWorldINTW136IntrawareITRA137ISS GroupISSX138iTurfTURF139iVillageIVIL140iXL EnterprisesIIXL141IXnetEXNT142JFAX.comJFAX143Juniper NetworksJNPR144Juno Online ServicesJWEB145Kana CommunicationsKANA146Launch MediaLAUN147Liberate TechnologiesLBRT148Lionbridge TechnologiesLIOX149Liquid AudioLQID150LitronicLTNX151Log On AmericaLOAX152LookSmartLOOK153Luminant WorldwideLUMT154LycosLCOS155Mail.comMAIL156MapQuest.comMQST157MarimbaMRBA158MarketWatch.comMKTW159Media MetrixMMXI160MindSpring EnterprisesMSPG161Modem Media.Poppe TysonMMPT162Mortgage.comMDCM163MP3.comMPPP164Mpath InteractiveMPTH165Multex.comMLTX166musicmaker.comHITS167MyPoints.comMYPT168NAVIDECNVDC169NEON SystemsNESY170Net PerceptionsNETP171NetB@nkNTBK172NetGravityNETG173Netivation.comNTVN174NetObjectsNETO175NetscapeNSCP176NetScout SystemsNTCT177NetSpeakNSPK178Net2PhoneNTOP179Network AssociatesNETA180Network SolutionsNSOL181Network-1 Security SolutionsNSSI182NextCardNXCD183nFront.comNFNT184N2H2NTWO185OneMain.comONEM186OneSource Information ServicesONES187Online Resources & CommunicationsORCC188onlinetradinginc.comLINE189ONSALEONSL190Open MarketOMKT191Open TextOTEX192Pacific InternetPCNTF193Pacific SoftworksPASW194PacketeerPKTR195pcOrder.comPCOR196PeapodPPOD197PerficientPRFT198Persistence SoftwarePRSW199Phone.comPHCM200Pilot Network ServicesPILT201Portal SoftwarePRSF202Preview TravelPTVL203priceline.comPCLN204Primus Knowledge SolutionsPKSI205Prodigy CommunicationsPRGY206Proteam.comPRTM207ProxicomPXCM208PSINetPSIX209PurchasePro.comPPRO210quepasa.comPASA211Quest SoftwareQSFT212Quokka SportsQKKA213QuotesmithQUOT214Ramp NetworksRAMP215RazorfishRAZF216RealNetworksRNWK217Red HatRHAT218Rhythms NetConnectionsRTHM219RMI.NETRMII220Rogue Wave SoftwareRWAV221RoweComROWE222RSA SecurityRSAS223Sagent TechnologySGNT224Salon.comSALN225ScientSCNT226Security DynamicsSDTI227Security First TechnologiesSONE228Silknet SoftwareSILK229SilverStream SoftwareSSSW230Software.comSWCM231Splitrock ServicesSPLT232SportsLine USASPLN233SpyglassSPYG234Stamps.comSTMP235StarMedia NetworkSTRM236Streamline.comSLNE237Student AdvantageSTAD238Talk CityTCTY239Tanning TechnologyTANN240Terayon Communication SystemsTERN241theglobe.comTGLO242TheStreet.comTSCM243THINK New IdeasTHNK244TIBCO SoftwareTIBX245Ticketmaster Online-CitySearchTMCS246Town Pages Net.comTPN247Tumbleweed CommunicationsTMWD248Tut SystemsTUTS249uBidUBID250U.S. InteractiveUSIT251US SEARCH Corp.comSRCH252USinternetworkingUSIX253USWeb/CKSUSWB254Value AmericaVUSA255VerioVRIO256VeriSignVRSN257VerticalNetVERT258ViantVIAN259VignetteVIGN260Visual DataVDAT261VocalTecVOCL262V-ONEVONE263VoxwareVOXW264Voyager.netVOYN265WebTrendsWEBT266White Pine SoftwareWPNE267Wink CommunicationsWINK268Wit Capital GroupWITC269WorldGate CommunicationsWGAT270Xoom.comXMCM271yesmail.comYESM272Yahoo!YHOO273ZDNet GroupZDZ274ZipLinkZIPL Appendix B List of names and tickers for the 274 randomly selected non-Net firms used in this study 1F F L C BANCORP INCFFLC2ANGELICA CORPAGL3WATSCO INCWSO4SCIOS INCSCIO5WORLD AIRWAYS INC NEWWLDA6SCIENTIFIC TECHNOLOGIES INCSTIZ7S E M X CORPSEMX8O S I SYSTEMS INCOSIS9E F C BANCORP INCEFC10WESTERBEKE CORPWTBK11FOOD TECHNOLOGY SERVICEVIFL12RAYTECH CORP DERAY13WESTERN BEEF INCBEEF14SPARTAN MOTORS INCSPAR15LUMISYS INCLUMI16HOME DEPOT INCHD17MOTOR CARGO INDUSTRIES INCCRGO18J M A R TECHNOLOGIES INCJMAR19PAMRAPO BANCORP INCPBCI20GLATFELTER P H COGLT21PSYCHEMEDICS CORPPMD22R H PHILLIPS INCRHPS23HAIN FOOD GROUP INCHAIN24WRIGLEY WILLIAM JR COWWY25THERMO TERRATECH INCTTT26AIRTRAN HOLDINGS INCAAIR27GENOME THERAPEUTICS CORPGENE28COMMONWEALTH INDUSTRIESCMIN29CELL THERAPEUTICS INCCTIC30RIGHT START INCRTST31DYNAMIC MATERIALS CORPBOOM32MEDICAL ASSURANCE INCMAI33ELECTROMAGNETIC SCIENCESELMG34TECH SYM CORPTSY35L S I LOGIC CORPLSI36HERLEY INDUSTRIES INCHRLY37NEW MEXICO & ARIZ LD CONZ38P F CHANGS CHINA BISTRO INCPFCB39PARLUX FRAGRANCES INCPARL40ASTRO-MEDICAL INC NEWALOT41TRAILER BRIDGE INCTRBR42MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPMENT43HOWELL CORPHWL44UNITED STATES LIME MINERALS USLM45OMEGA FINANCIAL CORPOMEF46CANYON RESOURCES CORPCAU47TECHNICLONE CORPTCLN48ANALOGY INCANLG49NATIONAL TECHTEAM INCTEAM50PRAXAIR INCPX51WASTE MANAGEMENT INC DELWMI52TODAYS MAN INCTMAN53INHALE THERAPEUTIC SYSTEMSINHL54CENTENNIAL CELLULAR CORPCYCL55NETWORK CONNECTION INCTNCX56GLIMCHER REALTY TRUSTGRT57TNETIX INCTNTX58J B OXFORD HOLDINGS INCJBOH59SCHWAB CHARLES CORP NEWSCH60AIRBORNE FREIGHT CORPABF61AVENUE ENTERTAINMENT GRPPIX62R S I SYSTEMS INCRSIS63NEWPORT CORPNEWP64TELEPHONE & DATA SYSTEMSTDS65CORNERSTONE BANK CONNCBN66OILGEAR COMPANYOLGR67GRACO INCGGG68ALABAMA NATIONAL BANCORP ALAB69OMTOOL LTDOMTL70BURKE MILLS INCBMLS71REDWOOD EMPIRE BANCORPREBC72PENNICHUCK CORPPNNW73VARI LITE INTERNATIONAL INCLITE74CAVANAUGHS HOSPITALITY CPCVH75UNITED RENTALS INCURI76ESENJAY EXPLORATION INCESNJ77FIRSTFED FINANCIAL CORPFED78FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES INCFLXS79FAROUDJA INCFDJA80PENN AMERICA GROUP INCPNG81LA BARGE INCLB82PUBLISHING CO NTH AMERICAPCNA83MICROWAVE POWER DEVICESMPDI84FACTORY 2 U INCFTUS85VIDAMED INCVIDA86KANKAKEE BANCORP INCKNK87SONUS CORPSSN88TRIMARK HOLDINGS INCTMRK89COMFORT SYSTEMS USA INCFIX90STARTEK INCSRT91INGERSOLL RAND COIR92ATRIX LABORATORIES INCATRX93CAPITAL BANK NCCBKN94ALUMINUM COMPANY AMERAA95BORDEN CHEM & PLASTICS LPBCU96SANTA FE FINANCIAL CORPSFEF97JABIL CIRCUIT INCJBL98CARRAMERICA REALTY CORPCRE99TRANSMEDIA NETWORK INCTMN100INTERFACE SYSTEMS INCINTF101MAXIM PHARMACEUTICALS INCMMP102HA LO INDUSTRIES INCHMK103AXENT TECHNOLOGIES INCAXNT104HUGHES SUPPLY INCHUG105CASCO INTERNATIONAL INCCASC106S G V BANCORP INCSGVB107C S S INDUSTRIES INCCSS108N C H CORPNCH109FINANCIAL INDUSTRIES CORPFNIN110CONSOLIDATED PRODUCTS INCCOP111PHARMCHEM LABORATORIESPCHM112C P S SYSTEMS INCSYS113ENHANCE FINANCIAL SVCS GRPEFS114A G L RESOURCES INCATG115ERIE INDEMNITY COERIE116DRUG EMPORIUM INCDEMP117MACDERMID INCMRD118ATLANTIC FINANCIAL CORPAFIC119MEDFORD BANCORP INCMDBK120INDUS INTERNATIONAL INCIINT121TAITRON COMPONENTS INCTAIT122HALLMARK CAPITAL CORPHALL123POINTE FINANCIAL CORPPNTE124COULTER PHARMACEUTICALCLTR125MICREL INCMCRL126WORLD ACCEPTANCE CORPWRLD127SMITH A O CORPAOS128DRYPERS CORPDYPR129MOBIUS MANAGEMENT SYSMOBI130ELLETT BROTHERS INCELET131ASHLAND INCASH132LIMITED INCLTD133ALLTRISTA CORPALC134NATIONAL PRESTO INDS INCNPK135UNIT CORPUNT136NEOMAGIC CORPORATIONNMGC137DIALYSIS CORP AMERICADCAI138GUARDIAN TECHNOLS INTL INCGRDN139MILLER HERMAN INCMLHR140OSAGE SYSTEMS GROUP INCOSE141METEOR INDUSTRIES INCMETR142KENAN TRANSPORT COKTCO143BESTFOODSBFO144R B RUBBER PRODUCTS INCRBBR145CHOICE HOTELS INTNL INCCHH146OAK INDUSTRIES INCOAK147WORLDWIDE ENT & SPTS INCWWES148SUNBURST HOSPITALITY CORPSNB149MULTI COLOR CORPLABL150PROGRESS SOFTWARE INCPRGS151ANTHRACITE CAPITAL INCAHR152HORMEL FOODS CORPHRL153BAY STATE GAS COBGC154SURETY CAPITAL CORPSRY155G A FINANCIAL INCGAF156IMPERIAL CREDIT INDUSTRIESICII157CHICAGO RIVET & MACH COCVR158ONE VALLEY BANCORP INCOV159A S A INTERNATIONAL LTDASAA160ROMAC INTERNATIONAL INCROMC161B F ENTERPRISES INCBFEN162AVERT INCAVRT163PERVASIVE SOFTWARE INCPVSW164E R C INDUSTRIES INC NEWERCI165ARIZONA INSTRUMENT CORPAZIC166CONSOLIDATED STORES CORPCNS167GALLAGHER ARTHUR J & COAJG168NORDSON CORPNDSN169BUCKLE INCBKE170MICROSEMI CORPMSCC171RANGE RESOURCES CORPRRC172MODIS PROFESSIONAL SVCS INCMPS173P L C SYSTEMS INCPLC174ALLSTATE FINANCIAL CORP VAASFN175ENDOCARDIAL SOLUTIONS INCECSI176ARTIFICIAL LIFEALIF177LAZARE KAPLAN INTL INCLKI178COMMERCIAL NET LEASE RLTY NNN179CYLINK CORPCYLK180CHICOS FAS INCCHCS181TRIPLE S PLASTICS INCTSSS182CARING PRODUCTS INTL INCBDRY183OLYMPIC CASCADE FINANCIAL NATS184REALNETWORKS INCRNWK185BROWN & SHARPE MFG COBNS186LITTON INDUSTRIES INCLIT187KRONOS INCKRON188T I B FINANCIAL CORPTIBB189FIRST SAVINGS BANCORP INC NCSOPN190U T I ENERGY CORPUTI191HEARTPORT INCHPRT192F Y I INCFYII193ABLE TELECOM HOLDING CORPABTE194WENDYS INTERNATIONAL INCWEN195GREATER DELW. VLY SVGS BKALLB196GRAY COMMUNICATIONS SYSGCS197AMWEST INSURANCE GROUP AMW198STANLEY WORKSSWK199ALPHANET SOLUTIONS INCALPH200CERPROBE CORPCRPB201IPALCO ENTERPRISES INCIPL202HARBOR FEDERAL BANCORP HRBF203HONEYWELL INCHON204FRANKLIN COVEY COFC205LEAP WIRELESS INTL INCLWIN206V R B BANCORPVRBA207CINCINNATI FINANCIAL CORPCINF208ZEBRA TECHNOLOGIES CORPZBRA209FALCON PRODUCTS INCFCP210CAPITAL TRUSTCT211CONGOLEUM CORP NEWCGM212WELLSFORD REAL PROPERTIESWRP213UNITED WISCONSIN SVCS INC UWZ214DIASYS CORPDIYS215AON CORPAOC216MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS INCMMSI217SECURITY CAPITAL GROUP INCSCZ218E TEK DYNAMICS INCETEK219CLARK BARDES HOLDINGS INCCLKB220BUTLER INTERNATIONAL INCBUTL221UNIQUE MOBILITY INCUQM222TRIDENT ROWAN GROUP INCTRGI223M B I A INCMBI224NORTHEAST IND BANC INCNEIB225NVEST L PNEW226DYNACQ INTERNATIONAL INCDYII227METAMOR WORLDWIDE INCMMWW228MICROSTRATEGY INCMSTR229DYNATRONICS CORPDYNT230SIPEX CORPSIPX231AQUA CARE SYSTEMS INCAQCR232SCHWEITZER MAUDUIT INTLSWM233TOYMAX INTERNATIONAL INCTMAX234HEARTLAND TECHNOLOGY INCHTI235OSHMANS SPORTING GOODS INCOSH236S P X CORPSPW237UNITED RETAIL GROUP INCURGI238P A B BANKSHARES INCPAB239DIEHL GRAPHSOFT INCDIEG240OFFSHORE LOGISTICS INCOLOG241HARBOR FLORIDA BANCORP INCHARB242V ONE CORPVONE243MEDTOX SCIENTIFIC INCTOX244CIPRICO INCCPCI245ENVIROGEN INCENVG246ECO SOIL SYSTEMS INCESSI247BURLINGTON COAT FACTORYBCF248COMPARE GENERIKS INCCOGE249SOMANETICS CORPSMTS250COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGIESCTT251ROCKY SHOES & BOOTS INCRCKY252S 2 GOLF INCGOLF253INTERSYSTEMS INCII254UNION CARBIDE CORPUK255BAKER J INCJBAK256TELEVIDEO INCTELV257METROWEST BANKMWBX258MACNEAL SCHWENDLER CORPMNS259AMETEK INC NEWAME260SYMONS INTERNATIONAL CORPSIGC261MEDIWARE INFORMATION SYS MEDW262TRUSTMARK CORPTRMK263P S GROUP HOLDINGS INCPSG264QLOGIC CORPQLGC265COMPUTER MOTION INCRBOT266PRESTIGE BANCORP INCPRBC267ARADIGM CORPARDM268UNITED TENNESSEE BKSHARESUTBI269REHABILICARE INCREHB270ACRODYNE COMMUNICATIONS ACRO271SAFETY 1ST INCSAFT272CHASE MANHATTAN CORP NEWCMB273CHEMFAB CORPCFA274ENRON CORPENE Appendix C List of names and tickers for the 213 IPO-matched non-Net firms used in this study 11-800 CONTACTS INCCTAC2ABN AMRO Holding N.V.AAN3AccelGraphics Inc.ACCL4Accredo Health Inc.ACDO5Actuate Software CorporationACTU6Advantage Learning SystemsALSI7AerovoxARVX8AirGate PCS Inc.PCSA9Aironet Wireless CommunsAIRO10Allscripts Inc.MDRX11American Axle & ManufacturingAXL12American Dental Partners Inc.ADPI13American Home Mortgage HoldgsAHMH14American Materials & Technol.AMTK15American National Can Group ICAN16American National FinancialANFI17Antenna TV S.A.ANTV18APACHE Medical Systems Inc.AMSI19AremisSoft CorporationAREM20Argosy Education Group Inc.ARGY21Arterial Vascular EngineeringAVEI22Asymetrix Learning SystemsASYM23AudioCodes Ltd.AUDC24Azurix CorporationAZX25Be Inc.BEOS26Bell & Howell CompanyBHW27Big Dog Holdings Inc.BDOG28BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.BMRN29BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.BMRN30Biopure CorporationBPUR31Biosite Diagnostics Inc.BSTE32Blockbuster Inc.BBI33Boyd's CollectionFOB34Brocade Communications Sys.BRCD35Buca Inc.BUCA36Capital Environmental ResourceCERI37CareInsite Inc.CARI38Carrier Access Corp.CACS39Catapult CommunicationsCATT40China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd.ZNH41Clark/Bardes Holdings Inc.CLKB42CombiChem Inc.CCHM43Command Systems Inc.CMND44Commonwealth BancorpCMSB45CompuCredit CorporationCCRT46Computer Literacy Inc.CMPL47Computer Motion Inc.RBOT48Concur Technologies Inc.CNQR49CONSOL Energy Inc.CNX50Consolidated Cigar Holdings Inc.CIG51Continuus Software Corp.CNSW52Convergys CorporationCVG53Corporate Executive Board Co.EXBD54CPS Systems Inc.SYS55Creo Products Inc.CREO56CuraGen CorporationCRGN57Data RaceRACE58Datalink CorporationDTLK59David's Bridal Inc.DABR60Denali Inc.DNLI61DePuy Inc.DPU62Descartes Systems GroupDSGX63Destia Communications Inc.DEST64Ditech CorporationDITC65Dunn ComputerDNCC66Efficient Networks Inc.EFNT67Enamelon Inc.ENML68Endovascular TechnologiesEVTI69Equity One Inc.EQY70ESPS Inc.ESPS71E-Tek DynamicsETEK72Evolving Systems Inc.EVOL73Exchange Applications Inc.EXAP74Extreme Networks Inc.EXTR75Fairchild Semiconductor Intl.FCS76FaxSav IncorporatedFAXX77Financial Institutions Inc.FISI78FloridaFirst BancorpFFBK79Focal Communications Corp.FCOM80Foundry Networks Inc.FDRY81Fox Entertainment Group Inc.FOX82Freds IncFRED83Gadzoox Networks Inc.ZOOX84Gene Logic Inc.GLGC85General Cable CorporationGCN86Gerber Childrenswear Inc.GCW87Global Direct Mail Corp.GML88Global Imaging Systems Inc.GISX89GlobeSpan Semiconductor Inc.GSPN90Goldman Sachs Group Inc.GS91Gradall Industruries Inc.GRDL92Greater Atlantic Financial Corp.GAFC93Heidrick & Struggles Int'l. Inc.HSII94Hub Group IncHUBG95Informatica Corp.INFA96Infosys TechnologiesINFY97Interactive Intelligence Inc.ININ98Invitrogen Corp.IVGN99Jore CorporationJORE100KCS GroupKCSG101Keynote Systems Inc.KEYN102Knoll Inc.KNL103Korn/Ferry InternationalKFY104LaBranche & Co Inc.LAB105Latitude Communications Inc.LATD106Lennox International Inc.LII107Maker Communications Inc.MAKR108McLeod Inc.MCLD109MCM Capital Group Inc.MCMC110Medscape Inc.MSCP111Mercury Computer Systems Inc.MRCY112Merkert AmericaMERK113Metals USA Inc.MUI114MetroCorp Bancshares Inc.MCBI115MicroFinancial Inc.MFI116Midway AirlinesMDWY117MIH LimitedMIHL118MIIX Group Inc.MHU119Mission Critical Software Inc.MCSW120MKS Instruments Inc.MKSI121Mobius Management SystemsMOBI122MONY Group Inc.MNY123National Information Consortium EGOV124NationsRent Inc.NRI125NCRIC Group Inc.NCRI126Netia HoldingsNTIA127Netro CorporationNTRO128Network Plus Corp.NPLS129NeurocrineNBIX130New American Healthcare Corp.NAH131NewGen Results Corp.NWGN132Nextera Enterprises Inc.NXRA133NorthPoint Commcns HoldingsNPNT134NovaMed Eyecare Inc.NOVA135Nutraceutical International Corp.NUTR136Nvidia Corp.NVDA137Onix Systems Inc.ONX138Onyx Software Corp.ONXS139Optibase Ltd.OBAS140Optical Sensors Inc.OPSI141P.F. Chang's China Bistro Inc.PFCB142Pantry Inc. (The)PTRY143Paradyne Corp.PDYN144Pepsi Bottling Group Inc.PBG145PhyMatrix Corp.PHMX146Pinnacle Holding Inc.BIGT147Pivotal CorporationPVTL148PLX Technology Inc.PLXT149Polycom Inc.PLCM150PrimaCom AGPCAG151Prism Financial Corp.PRFN152Prism Solutions Inc.PRZM153Private Business Inc.PBIZ154PrivateBancorp Inc.PVTB155PrivateBancorp Inc.PVTB156Prosperity BancsharesPRSP157ProVantage Health Services Inc.PHS158Radio One Inc.ROIA159RAVISENT Technologies Inc.RVST160RDO Eequipment Co.RDO161Redback Networks Inc.RBAK162Roadhouse Grill Inc.GRLL163Rubio's Restaurants Inc.RUBO164Rutherford-Moran Oil Corp.RMOC165Salem Communications Corp.SALM166SalesLogix CorporationSLGX167Santa Fe International Corp.SDC168Sapient CorpSAPE169SBA Communications Corp.SBAC170Scheid Vineyards Inc.SVIN171Scientific Learning Corp.SCIL172Scientific Learning Corp.SCIL173Seminis Inc.SMNS174ShowCase CorporationSHWC175Skechers U.S.A. Inc.SKX176Skylands BankSKCB177Software AG Systems Inc.AGS178StanCorp Finacial GroupSFG179STAR Telecommunications Inc.STRX180Statia Terminals Group N.V.STNV181Steel Dynamics Inc.STLD182Suburban Lodges of AmericaSLAM183Sun Community Bancorp Ltd,SCBL184Swisscom AGSCM185TC PipeLines LPTCLPZ186TenFold CorporationTENF187The Yankee Candle Co. Inc.YCC188Time Warner Telecom Inc.TWTC189Tower Financial Corp.TOFC190Transition Systems Inc.TSIX191Trex Co. Inc.TWP192Troy Group Inc.TROY193Troy Group Inc.TROY194Tuesday Morning Corp.TUES195U.S. Aggregates Inc.AGA196Ultradata CorporationULTD197United Therapeutic Corp.UTHR198United Therapeutic Corp.UTHR199USA Detergents Inc.USAD200Vail BanksVAIL201VaxGen Inc.VXGN202Vestcom International Inc.VESC203VIALOGVLOG204Vitria Technology Inc.VITR205Watchguard Technologies Inc.WGRD206Wavecom S.A.WVCM207WESCO International Inc.WCC208Westfield America Inc.WEA209Willbros Group Inc.WG210Women First HealthCare Inc.WFHC211Worldtalk Communications CorpWTLK212Zany Brainy Inc.ZANY213Zindart LimitedZNDTY Appendix D Summary derivation of Ye and Finns (1999) log-linear accounting based valuation model This appendix summarizes the derivation detailed in Ye and Finn (1999, pp.10-12). Ye and Finn replace Ohlsons (1995) AR(1) assumption in abnormal earnings with an AR(1) assumption in abnormal return on equity (ROE). Ye and Finn argue that the AR(1) assumption in unnormalized abnormal earnings is reasonable only if a firms equity book value BV remains constant over time. This requires the implausible condition that net dividends Dt are identical to net income NIt (e.g., the firm neither repurchases nor issues stock, and pays cash dividends equal to net income). The derivation of the log-linear model begins from the restated clean surplus relation:  EMBED Equation.3  (D.1) where BVt is equity book value at the end of the period. Defining  EMBED Equation.3  permits (D.1) to be rewritten as:  EMBED Equation.3  (D.2) In order to obtain a closed form valuation solution, Ye and Finn assume that the firms net dividend Dt = 0. While this assumption is violated in real life, whether it is a more or less accurate assumption than that underlying the Ohlson (1995) model is an empirical question. Given Dt = 0, assume that  EMBED Equation.3  follows the AR(1) process  EMBED Equation.3  (D.3) where r is the equilibrium long-run ROE (equal to the cost of equity capital in competitive markets), (t are uncorrelated zero-mean random variables with bounded moments, and it reflects the additional amount of information on rt available at time t = 0 but not reflected in r0. Under these assumptions, Theorem 2 in Ye and Finn (1999) states that:  EMBED Equation.3  (D.4) (  EMBED Equation.3  (D.5) where Et[.] is the expectation operator at t; (* is a linear combination of (t, t = [1,T];  EMBED Equation.3 (  EMBED Equation.3 ; and c may depend on T and (. Let the intrinsic value of the firm V0 be the terminal value at T discounted to t = 0, that is:  EMBED Equation.3  (D.6) where R is the cost of equity capital discount rate. Then by Theorem 2 expressed in equation (D.5) above, V0 can be written as:  EMBED Equation.3  (D.7) where ( may depend on r and T. Equation (D.7) provides the motivation for expressing the market value of Net firms equity as a multiplicative, log-linear function of book equity and net income. References Amir, E., and B. Lev, 1996, Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: The wireless communications industry, Journal of Accounting & Economics 22, 1-3, 3-30. Barth, M.E., Beaver, W.H., and W.R. Landsman, 1998, Relative valuation roles of equity book value and net income as a function of financial health, Journal of Accounting & Economics 25; 1-34. Berger, P.G., Ofek, E., and I. Swary, 1996, Investor valuation of the abandonment option, Journal of Financial Economics 42, 257-287. Brown, S., Lo, K., and T. Lys, 1999, Use of R-squared in accounting research: measuring changes in value relevance over the last four decades, working paper, Northwestern Univ. Collins, D.W., Pincus, M., and H. Xie, 1999, Equity valuation and negative earnings: The role of book value of equity, The Accounting Review 74, 29-61. Cooper, M., Dimitrov, O., and P.R. Rau, 1999, A rose.com by any other name, working paper, Purdue University. Dechow, P.M., Hutton, A.P., and R.G. Sloan, 1999, An empirical assessment of the residual income valuation model, Journal of Accounting & Economics 26, 1-34. Feltham, G.A., and J.A. Ohlson, 1995, Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities, Contemporary Accounting Research 11, 689-732. Feltham, G.A., and J.A. Ohlson, 1996, Uncertainty resolution and the theory of depreciation measurement, Journal of Accounting Research 34, 2, 209-234. Frankel, R., and C.M.C. Lee, 1998, Accounting valuation, market expectation and cross-sectional stock returns, Journal of Accounting & Economics 25, 283-320. Gerstein, M.H., 1999, Sales growth leaders,  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com Research, 11/16/99. Hand, J.R.M., and W.R. Landsman, 1999, The pricing of dividends in equity valuation, working paper, UNC Chapel Hill. Hand, J.R.M., 2000a, Underpricing as marketing: the case of Internet IPOs, work-in-process, UNC Chapel Hill. Hand, J.R.M., 2000b, The profitability of Internet firms, work-in-process, UNC Chapel Hill. Hand, J.R.M., 2000c, The emperors new clothes? The (im)plausibility of long-run economic rents embedded in Internet stock prices, work-in-process, UNC Chapel Hill. Hand, J.R.M., 2000d, Back to the future? Lessons from comparing the pricing of Internet and biotechnology stocks, work-in-process, UNC Chapel Hill. Harris, T.S., and D. Kemsley, 1999, Dividend taxation in firm valuation, Journal of Accounting Research, forthcoming. Ip, G., 1999, Analyst discovers the order in Internet stocks valuations, The Wall Street Journal, 12/27/99. Kaplan, S.N., and R.S. Ruback, 1995, The valuation of cash flow forecasts: An empirical analysis, Journal of Finance 50, 1059-1093. Kim, O., and R. Verrecchia, 1997, Pre-announcement and event-period information, Journal of Accounting & Economics 24, 395-419. Lee, C.M.C., Myers, J., and B. Swaminathan, 1999, What is the intrinsic value of the Dow?, Journal of Finance 54, 1693-1742. Lev, B., and T. Sougiannis, 1996, The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D, Journal of Accounting and Economics 21, 107-138. Mauboussin, M.J., 1999, Get real: using real options in security analysis, Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.,  HYPERLINK http://www.capatcolumbia.com/frontiers/Fof10.pdf. http://www.capatcolumbia.com/frontiers/Fof10.pdf. Ohlson, J.A., 1995, Earnings, equity book values, and dividends in equity valuation, Contemporary Accounting Research, 661-687. Ohlson, J.A., 1999, Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation: An empirical perspective, forthcoming in Contemporary Accounting Research. Ritter, J.R., 1998, Initial public offerings, Warren Gorham & Lamont Handbook of Modern Finance, D.Logue and J. Seward, eds. Schill, M.J., and C. Zhou, 1999, Pricing an emerging industry: Evidence from Internet subsidiary carve-outs, working paper, UC Riverside. Wooley, S., 1999, Believe it or net, Virtual Investor, 1/27/99. Wysocki, P.D., 1999a, Cheap talk on the web: The determinants of postings on stock message boards, working paper, University of Michigan Business School. Wysocki, P.D., 1999b, Private information, earnings announcements and trading volume, or Stock chat on the Internet: A public debate about private information, working paper, University of Michigan Business School. Ye, J., 1998, A statistical quest for equity valuation models, working paper, University of Chicago. Ye, J., and Finn, M., 1999, Nonlinear and nonparametric accounting-based equity valuation models, working paper, Baruch College. Yee, K.K., 1999, Residual income valuation of an optimally adaptive firm, forthcoming in Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance. Zhang, G., 1999, Accounting information, capital investment decisions, and equity valuation: Theory and empirical implications, working paper, January. FIGURE 1 Performance of the Internet Stock Index (ISDEXTM) vs. NASDAQ Index ($COMPQ) over the period 1/1/97 to 12/27/99  FIGURE 2 Undeflated, per-share, and logged market value vs. pre-income book equity and core net income for 167 Net firms (1997:Q11999:Q2) PANEL A Undeflated: market value vs. pre-net income book equity Market value ($ millions) 200000 | A | | | | A 180000 | | A | | | 160000 | A | | | | 140000 | | | | | 120000 | A | | | | 100000 | A A | | | | 80000 | | A | A | | A 60000 | | A | A | | A 40000 | | AA A | | A | B A 20000 | AA A A | ABAA | AA A | AEAAAAA | IZQIEBA 0 | ZZO A ---|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------| 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 Pre-net income book equity ($ millions) PANEL B Undeflated: market value vs. core net income Market value ($ millions) 200000 | A | | | | A 180000 | | A | | | 160000 | A | | | | 140000 | | | | | 120000 | A | | | | 100000 | AA | | | | 80000 | | A | A | | A 60000 | | A | A | | A 40000 | | A A A | | A | A AA 20000 | A A AA | A BA A | AA A | BADBA A |A A CEHXYIGA 0 | ADRZZJA -|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Core net income ($ millions) PANEL C Per-share: market value vs. pre-net income book equity Stock price ($ per share) 350 | | | | | A | | 300 | | | | | | | A 250 | | A | A | | | | 200 | | | | A | A A A | | A A A A 150 | AA A | AA | AA A | AA AA B | A A A A A | A A A AA | A ABAAB 100 | A A A A AA | A AA AAA A | AA A A A A | AA B AAA A A A | BB DCB B A A | BABABACBB AA A | ABB A B B AC A A B A A A A 50 | A AADCA CBBB A CA A A A A | A BCDG EDBACB A B ACBA A | A AFEBHBCDDAC B A B AA A | ABACEEGDCFDDBBBBA AA A A | A CCDFKIAFGCCDCFDB BCAAB A A A | AAEDIOONHKLDGEGC D AA | ACGNRPMRRHIGCABCCA A 0 | GJFNHCGAA | --|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Pre-net income book equity ($ per share) PANEL D Per-share: market value vs. core net income Stock price ($ per share) 350 | | | | | A | | 300 | | | | | | | A 250 | | A | A | | | | 200 | | | | A | A A A | | A A AA 150 | B A | A A | A A A | AA A A A A | A A A A A | A A B A | AAAA A B A 100 | A A A AA A | A A A BA A | A CAA | A A AC A A AA | A A A A A A BA BBAB A | A A A AAAAA CAB AAB A | A A BB AA C CBA BB A 50 | B A A B AB CDB AC AAAA A A A | A A AAA CBBGECECAA D A AB | A A B BDCGDAAHDBCC AA | A A A CBABCBBBAHCBDEFD C A A | AAAC BCCBCGCAEDEIHDFCFBDA A | B CA AAABDECFFIGIOIKIDDEDAABA A | A A A ABDGFNPXRWGJFD A 0 | AA BBABABCEMNED A | -|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------| -3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Core net income ($ per share) PANEL E Log: market value vs. pre-net income book equity loge{Market value + 1} (Market value in $ millions) 14 | | | | | | | A 12 | A B | A | B | A AA | AA | BA A | A 10 | AB A A A | A B AA A | A A A | A A A A A | AA BA A | A A A A AB AAAB BA | AAAA CCBCB AABA B A 8 | A A BDA BCAAACC A AA | A A B DABAAA BBA A | AABACEA AEBAB AC | CB DCC AE AAAA | A AADCEBABEBD BCE A | A AAA EFDEEEEC CBCBB | BAA BECIFFGAAADA BB A 6 | A A A ABBCBEIGBABD | A A A CBCDAGDHDABB | AB ACBCDDEBDBCCAB | A AACCDHHECCABA A | AABADBCBCDFDEABA | B BAAABBICCCAA | A AA CCDFC BCC A A 4 | A A B AAAABDAAC B | A B C AABCAB B | A ACB BACDB A | AAAAA AA A AA | AACAA AA A | A B ABBBCA AA A | A CBAA AA 2 | B AAA A | A BA | | | | | 0 | | --|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 loge{pre-income book equity + 1} (pre-income book equity > 0 in $ millions) PANEL F Log: market value vs. core net income loge{Market value + 1} (Market value in $ millions) 14 | | | | | | | A 12 | A B | A | AA | A B | AA | A A A A | A 10 | A A A A B | A AA AA A | A A A | AA A A A | A AAA A A | B CB A A B A B A | AB BBABA D A A A A A B A AA 8 | A BAAAAC B AB A AA ADA B | A BCA CAB A A A AA AA | BB CBBAAADA A AA BA B B | A BC BAC B DAB B B | BBAAB CDCCADBB A A BACD | BBAB BABEGCCBD C A CAABBA C A | AAACAFAADDFEAB B CACA BC AAA 6 | ABBDEDFBCBA AA A ABA BA A | BDCGEDDBBDABA A B | BABCBHACBAABB A C ABABAA | ABBCDBCDDBE BD B C A A | ACCBFHECCAA BAAAA | AEDBBBBB A B CBAAA | A ABB IEEAAB AB 4 | ABAGBDB AA | BACAFCA A | AAABHC BAA | A BBBAB | AAAABABA | BDECBA | B BCAAA 2 | B AA AA | A AAA | | | | | 0 | | --|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------| -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 loge{CNI+1} if CNI > 0; -loge{-CNI+1} if CNI < 0 (CNI in $ millions) TABLE 1 Comparison of general information between Internet firms and non-Internet firmsa Equity # of # of % of % of # trading % of 1st day market employees institns. stock stock in days for public Mean % under- value at end of last holding held by public float to float analyst pricinge ($ mil.) fiscal year Betaf stockg institns.h floati turns overj shortedk ratingl Panel A: Min. -24% $ 13 6 0.40 0 0% 6% 3 0% 1.0 Median 37 865 169 2.55 29 8 31 19 5 1.6 N = 274 Mean 69 5175 418 2.85 79 13 37 24 9 1.6 Internet firmsb Max. 606 357306 21000 7.74 2711 68 98 306 76 3.0 # obs. 272 261 254 78 259 261 261 251 258 242 % < 0 10% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Panel B: Min.  m $ 1 2 -1.52 0 0% 1% 4 0% 1.0 N = 274 firms Median  87 417 0.78 34 27 62 143 1 2.0 randomly chosen Mean  2029 4521 0.86 126 34 59 193 3 2.1 from non-Net firms Max.  149078 156700 3.77 2054 95 99 1450 49 4.0 publicly-traded # obs.  274 270 270 272 274 274 238 220 185 on 12/31/98c % < 0  0% 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Panel C: Min. -33% $ 2 6 -0.82 0 0% 7% 4 0% 1.0 Median 9 418 344 1.20 24 14 34 71 1 1.6 N = 213 firms Mean 27 1511 1733 1.20 45 19 39 129 4 1.7 that went public Max. 525 35743 36900 3.17 364 84 99 3550 32 3.0 at the same time # obs. 208 190 186 61 189 190 190 180 177 173 as Net firmsd % < 0 14% 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 See next page for footnotes. TABLE 1 (continued) Comparison of general information between Internet firms and non-Internet firmsa Footnotes: a All data were taken from  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com on 12/28/99 (where available) using a dynamic web data pull in Excel, unless otherwise noted. Details of data item definitions can be found at  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.html http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.html. b The n = 271 firms listed on  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.coms InternetStockList (Complete list of all publicly traded Internet stocks) on 11/1/99 plus 3 firms on earlier listings that were no longer traded on 11/1/99 (Excite, Geocities, and Netscape). c Randomly selected from the set of all firms publicly traded at 12/31/98 per the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP). d Non-Net firms that went public within a few trading days of the Net firms per CRSP,  HYPERLINK http://www.ipomaven.com www.ipomaven.com and  HYPERLINK http://www.ipocentral.com www.ipocentral.com. e Underpricing data are taken from CRSP,  HYPERLINK http://www.ipocentral.com www.ipocentral.com and  HYPERLINK http://www.sec.gov www.sec.gov. Underpricing is defined as the difference between the closing price at the end of the 1st day of trading and the offer price, as a percentage of the offer price. f The slope of the 60 month regression line of the percentage price change of the stock relative to the percentage price change of the S&P 500. Not calculated if there is less than 24 months of data available. If unavailable from  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com but available at  HYPERLINK http://www.stocksheet.com www.stocksheet.com, then taken from  HYPERLINK http://www.stocksheet.com www.stocksheet.com. g Number of institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, etc.) that report an investment position in the firms stock. h Shares held by institutions divided by total shares outstanding. i Public float divided by total shares outstanding. Public float is the number of freely traded shares in the hands of the public, defined as total shares outstanding less shares held by insiders, 5% owners, and Rule 144 shares. j Public float divided by average daily trading volume. Average daily trading volume is total trading volume over the prior 3 months divided by 66. k Number of shares sold short divided by total shares outstanding (as of 11/8/99). l Analyst ratings are coded as: Strong buy = 1, Buy = 2, Hold = 3, Underperform = 4, Sell = 5. Ratings are as of 12/23/99. m Data are not yet collected. TABLE 2 Comparison of earnings and revenues between Internet firms and non-Internet firmsa Mean Mean Forecast Actual Actual # of Std. dev. Std. dev. Std. dev. Actual forecast forecast long-term 1-year 3-year analysts $ EPS $ EPS long-term $ EPS $ EPS $ EPS EPS revenue revenue forecasting 1999 2000 EPS growth 1998e 1999f 2000f growthg growthh growthh for 1999i forecastsj forecastsj forecastsj Panel A: Min. -113.34 -8.95 -6.76 15% -57% -66% 0 $ 0 $ 0.01 0% Median -1.04 -0.87 -0.76 50 119 115 4 0.04 0.08 14 N = 274 Mean -2.36 -1.09 -0.90 55 268 179 5.8 0.09 0.15 17 Internet firmsb Max. 4.60 2.27 2.99 201 1000 1000 42 1.39 1.17 93 # obs. 244 239 235 198 234 125 261 218 215 122 % < 0 87% 83 73 0 7 4 0 0 0 0 Panel B: Min. -12.79 -12.54 -1.75 0% -97% -61% 0 $ 0 $ 0 0% N = 274 firms Median 0.44 0.80 1.12 17 11 15 1 0.03 0.06 3 randomly chosen Mean 0.41 0.88 1.31 20 29 30 3.9 0.06 0.10 5 from non-Net firms Max. 8.32 5.54 6.04 88 877 897 29 0.86 0.67 53 publicly-traded # obs. 268 187 165 140 269 262 274 133 118 100 on 12/31/98c % < 0 32% 18 8 0 22 16 0 0 0 0 Panel C: Min. -94.95 -3.71 -5.79 8% -54% -45% 0 $ 0 $ 0 0% Median 0.04 0.40 0.58 30 45 36 3 0.02 0.04 5 N = 213 firms Mean -0.85 0.19 0.44 32 126 93 3.9 0.08 0.10 8 that went public Max. 11.32 4.87 5.38 111 1000 1000 23 1.48 1.29 51 at the same time # obs. 170 169 167 133 179 134 190 147 138 92 as Net firmsd % < 0 49% 31 23 0 11 7 0 0 0 0 See next page for footnotes. TABLE 2 (continued) Comparison of earnings and revenues between Internet firms and non-Internet firms Footnotes: a All data were taken from  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com on 12/28/99 (where available) using a dynamic web data pull in Excel, unless otherwise noted. Details of data item definitions can be found at  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.html http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.html. b The n = 271 firms listed on  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.coms InternetStockList (Complete list of all publicly traded Internet stocks) on 11/1/99 plus 3 firms on earlier listings that were no longer traded on 11/1/99 (Excite, Geocities, and Netscape). c Randomly selected from the set of all firms publicly traded at 12/31/98 per the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP). d Non-Net firms that went public within a few trading days of the Net firms per CRSP,  HYPERLINK http://www.ipomaven.com www.ipomaven.com and  HYPERLINK http://www.ipocentral.com www.ipocentral.com. e Actual $ EPS 1998 data are taken from  HYPERLINK http://www.stocksheet.com www.stocksheet.com and are for the firms most recently completed fiscal year (typically ending 12/31/98). EPS is defined as earnings per share from total operations (continuing plus discontinued operations) as taken from the 10-K, 10-Q, or preliminary statements. For firms that have gone public in 1999, actual $ EPS 1998 data reported by  HYPERLINK http://www.stocksheet.com www.stocksheet.com are not on a pro-forma basis that would reflect the IPO. Further details on this definition can be found at  HYPERLINK http://www.stocksheet.com/definitions.html http://www.stocksheet.com/definitions.html. This explains the huge negative outliers in panels A and C. f Forecasts are for diluted EPS excluding extraordinary items and discontinued operations. g Compound annual growth rate forecasted for EPS excluding extraordinary items and discontinued operations over the next 5 years. h Revenue growth rates greater than 1000% have been set to 1000%. i Only defined for those firms where equity market value is non-missing. j Only defined for those firms where there are 3 or more analyst forecasts of the item. TABLE 3 Data definitions for variables used in historical descriptive statistics and regressions. All variables are in $ millions. Variable Label Compustat quarterly data item (description), and/or computation details Equity market value MVE 14 (closing price at end of fiscal quarter) x 61 (common shares outstanding at end of fiscal quarter). Income statement (for fiscal quarter) Special items SPEC 32 (special items). Net income NI 69 (net income or loss). Core net income CNI NI SPEC. Revenues REV 2 (net sales). Expenses EXP REV NI. Cost of sales COGS 30 (cost of goods sold). Selling, general + admin. expense SGA 1 (selling, general and administrative expense). Selling + marketing expense MKTG Hand-collected from 10-Qs. Not available on quarterly Compustat. Research + development costs RD 4 (research + development expense). Does not include writeoffs of purchased in-process R&D since those are in special items. General + admin. expense GA SGA MKTG RD unless GA < 0 in which case GA = SGA MKTG. Depreciation DEP 5 (depreciation and amortization). Balance sheet (at end of fiscal quarter) Cash + short-term investments CASH 36 (cash + short-term investments). Current assets CA 40 (total current assets). PP&E, net PPE 42 (total net property, plant and equipment). Total assets TA 44 (total assets). Current liabilities CL 49 (total current liabilities). Long-term debt LTD 51 (long-term debt). Total liabilities TL 54 (total liabilities). Equity book value BV 60 (total common equity at end of fiscal quarter). Book equity before quarters NI PIBV BV NI {pre-income book equity} Retained earnings RE 58 (retained earnings). Contributed capital CC BV RE. TABLE 4 Means and medians of key economic variables and ratios for 167 Net firms publicly traded at the end of at least one fiscal quarter during the period 1997:Q11999:Q2 Contrasts across positive vs. negative quarterly core net income firm-quarter observations Variable and ratio definitions (see table 3 for further details) MVE = market value of equity at end of fiscal quarter PIBV = book value of equity at end of fiscal quarter before inclusion of quarters net income CNI = core net income for fiscal quarter (= net income less special items) REV = net sales for fiscal quarter RD = research and development expense for fiscal quarter MKTG = selling and marketing expense for fiscal quarter PR = price-to-sales ratio (MVE ( REV) RDR = RD as a percentage of sales (RD ( REV) MR = selling and marketing expenses as a percentage of sales (MKTG ( REV) ROE = percentage core return on equity (CNI ( PIBV) BM = book-to-market ratio (BV ( MVE) Panel A: Means (in $ millions, unless % or ratios) MVE PIBV CNI REV RD MKTG PR RDR MR ROE BM CNI > 0a $ 9872 576 40.7 226 34.8 44.9 52 14% 28% 4.7% 0.17 CNI < 0b 1444 113 8.7 21 2.8 7.3 116 42% 80% 20.3% 0.21 t-testc 3.5 3.5 4.9 4.3 3.7 4.1 4.9 4.2 9.4 7.3 2.5 Panel B: Medians (in $ millions, unless % or ratios) MVE PIBV CNI REV RD MKTG PR RDR MR ROE BM CNI > 0a $ 778 99 3.3 29 2.5 7.6 25 13% 25% 3.2% 0.12 CNI < 0b 297 51 4.2 7 1.0 4.0 39 15% 54% 8.9% 0.15 Z-statisticd 6.9 7.0 19.6 11.1 5.9 6.6 4.5 2.6 10.5 19.6 2.3 a N = 165 firm-quarters where Net firms had positive quarterly core net income. b N = 564 firm-quarters where Net firms had negative quarterly core net income.. c t-statistic testing for a difference in means (assuming unequal variances). d Z-statistic on Wilcoxon 2-sample rank sums test for a difference in medians (Normal approximation). TABLE 5 Log-linear OLS multiple regressions of Internet firms end-of-fiscal-quarter equity market value LMVE on accounting variables.a Data are restricted to firm-quarters in which pre-income book equity PIBV > 0 and core net income CNI > 0. Regressions are pooled time-series cross-sectional with calendar quarter dummiesb Panel A: Pearson correlationsc (n = 165) LPIBV LCNI LREV LEXP LCOGS LGA LRD LMKTG LMVE 0.90 0.83 0.85 0.82 0.74 0.76 0.76 0.85 LPIBV 0.87 0.89 0.87 0.79 0.78 0.83 0.91 LCNI 0.89 0.87 0.79 0.81 0.84 0.86 LREV 0.99 0.94 0.90 0.80 0.94 LEXP 0.95 0.90 0.79 0.93 LCOGS 0.85 0.66 0.81 LGA 0.80 0.84 LRD 0.89 Panel B: OLS multiple regressions where dependent variable = LMVE Coefficient estimate on the following independent variables: Intercept LPIBV LCNI LREV LEXP LCOGS LGA LRD LMKTG #obs. Adj.R2 6.89d 165 2% [13.7]e 1.03 1.22 165 82% [3.4] (26.6)f 4.90 1.08 165 72% [17.6] (20.3) 1.86 0.93 0.31 165 83% [4.9] (10.0) (3.6) 1.41 0.83 1.23 (0.86 163 83% [4.5] (7.7) (2.3) ((1.7) 1.42 0.74 0.62 (0.31 0.16 0.01 0.05 153 83% [3.0] (5.6) (2.1) ((2.1) (1.3) (0.0) (0.2) a LZ = loge[Z + 1], where Z ( 0 is $ millions. See table 3 for definitions of data items Z prior to log transformations. b Sample is 167 Internet firms publicly traded at the end of one or more of their fiscal quarters 1997:Q11999:Q2. c All correlations are reliably non-zero with p-values of less than 0.001. d Mean coefficient on the ten quarter dummies 1997:Q11999:Q2 when no intercept is permitted. e Mean t-statistic on the ten quarter dummy coefficients when no intercept is permitted, multiplied by 10.01/2 = 3.16. f t-statistic relative to a null of zero. TABLE 6 Log-linear OLS multiple regressions of Internet firms end-of-fiscal-quarter equity market value LMVE on accounting variables.a Data are restricted to firm-quarters in which pre-income book equity PIBV > 0 and core net income CNI < 0. Regressions are pooled time-series cross-sectional with calendar quarter dummiesb Panel A: Pearson correlationsc (n = 564 or 530) LPIBV LCNI LREV LEXP LCOGS LGA LRD LMKTG LMVE 0.84 0.66 0.71 0.79 0.63 0.60 0.49 0.76 LPIBV 0.69 0.66 0.76 0.60 0.60 0.44 0.73 LCNI 0.61 0.80 0.66 0.66 0.33 0.70 LREV 0.95 0.88 0.78 0.42 0.82 LEXP 0.88 0.81 0.44 0.87 LCOGS 0.71 0.25 0.69 LGA 0.29 0.67 LRD 0.58 Panel B: OLS multiple regressions where dependent variable = LMVE Coefficient estimate on the following independent variables: Intercept LPIBV LCNI LREV LEXP LCOGS LGA LRD LMKTG #obs. Adj.R2 5.34d 564 14% [24.9]e 1.34 1.09 564 73% [7.7] (34.4)f 3.52 1.12 564 49% [17.9] (19.7) 1.41 0.95 0.29 564 74% [8.2] (22.8) (5.4) 1.33 0.70 0.01 0.57 564 78% [8.4] (15.8) (0.0) (5.1) 1.73 0.66 0.24 0.03 0.03 0.23 0.29 530 78% [10.5] (14.8) (2.7) (0.5) (0.4) (4.3) (3.2) a Each variable except LCNI is LZ = loge[Z + 1], where Z ( 0 is $ millions. LCNI = loge[CNI + 1] < 0. See table 3 for definitions of data items prior to log transformations. b Sample is 167 Internet firms publicly traded at the end of one or more of their fiscal quarters 1997:Q11999:Q2. c All correlations are reliably non-zero with p-values of less than 0.001. d Mean coefficient on the ten quarter dummies 1997:Q11999:Q2 when no intercept is permitted. e Mean t-statistic on the ten quarter dummy coefficients when no intercept is permitted, multiplied by 10.01/2 = 3.16. f t-statistic relative to a null of zero. TABLE 7 Log-linear regressions of equity values of Internet firms before, at and after their IPO on accounting variables. Data are restricted to firm-quarters in which pre-income book equity PIBV > 0 and core net income CNI < 0a Each regression variable LZ ( {LMVE, LPIBV} is defined as LZ = loge[Z + 1], where Z ( 0 is $ millions. The variable LCNI is defined as loge[CNI + 1] if CNI ( 0, but as (loge[(CNI + 1] if CNI < 0. See table 3 for definitions of data items prior to log transformations. End of event-quarter accounting data Dependent variableb is taken fromc Intercept LPIBV LCNI #obs. Adj.R2 LMVE{final offer price} Q0 1.78 0.79 0.26 116 72% (7.3) (10.5) (3.2) LMVE{close of 1st trading day} Q0 1.41 0.99 0.29 116 66% (4.1) (9.3) (2.5) LMVE{end of Q0} Q0 1.19 1.06 0.27 116 64% (3.1) (9.0) (2.2) LMVE{end of Q+1} Q+1 0.58 1.34 0.03 73 73% (1.4) (8.5) (0.2) LMVE{end of Q+2} Q+2 1.15 1.03 0.28 56 72% (3.1) (7.1) (1.4) LMVE{end of Q+3} Q+3 1.19 0.96 0.42 49 74% (3.1) (6.9) (2.2) LMVE{end of Q+4} Q+4 1.08 1.05 0.33 46 69% (2.4) (6.9) (1.6) LMVE{end of Q+5} Q+5 1.23 1.00 0.41 39 67% (2.5) (5.8) (1.7) LMVE{end of Q+6} Q+6 1.25 1.10 0.21 34 80% (3.2) (8.1) (1.1) LMVE{end of Q+7} Q+7 1.94 0.74 0.54 29 70% (3.9) (3.6) (1.9) LMVE{end of Q+8} Q+8 1.06 0.96 0.42 27 80% (2.3) (6.3) (1.9) a The subset of the n = 274 Internet firms described in panel A of table 1 that went public between 1997:Q1 and 1999:Q2. b Equity values use the price denoted in {.} and shares outstanding at that time, with the exception of LMVE{final offer price} and LMVE{1st day close}. These are based on the number of shares outstanding immediately after the IPO. c Event time relative to IPO quarter = Q0. Thus Q1 is the fiscal quarter ending immediately prior to the IPO date. TABLE 8 Log-linear regressions of equity values of Internet firms before, at and after their IPO on accounting variables. Data are restricted to firm-quarters in which pre-income book equity PIBV > 0 and core net income CNI < 0a Each regression variable LZ ( {LMVE, LPIBV, LREV, LCOGSGA, LRD, LMKTG} is defined as LZ = loge[Z + 1], where Z ( 0 is $ millions. See table 3 for definitions of data items prior to log transformations. End of event-quarter Dependent accounting data variableb is taken from Intercept LPIBV LREV LCOGSGA LRD LMKTG #obs. Adj.R2 LMVE{final offer price} Q0c 1.88 0.63 0.05 0.17 0.26 0.34 107 77% (8.4)d (9.1) (0.6) (1.7) (3.0) (3.4) LMVE{1st day close} Q0 1.62 0.74 0.00 0.16 0.40 0.60 107 73% (5.1) (7.5) (0.0) (1.1) (3.4) (4.2) LMVE{end of Q0} Q0 1.34 0.82 0.13 0.33 0.63 0.47 107 72% (3.8) (7.5) (0.9) (2.1) (4.8) (3.0) LMVE{end of Q+1} Q+1 1.02 0.77 0.10 0.25 0.21 0.67 68 80% (2.9) (5.6) (0.3) (0.8) (1.2) (3.1) LMVE{end of Q+k} Q+k 1.45 0.64 0.46 0.02 0.36 0.22 263 82% for k = 2 to 8, pooled (10.4) (11.5) (3.5) (0.2) (4.6) (1.6) a The subset of the n = 274 Internet firms described in panel A of table 1 that went public between 1997:Q1 and 1999:Q2. b Equity values use the price denoted in {.} and shares outstanding at that time, with the exception of LMVE{final offer price} and LMVE{1st day close}. These are based on the number of shares outstanding immediately after the IPO. c Event time relative to IPO quarter = Q0. Thus Q1 is the fiscal quarter ending immediately prior to the IPO date. d t-statistic relative to a null of zero. TABLE 9 Comparison of parameter estimates and measures of goodness-of-fit from log-linear, per-share and unscaled OLS regressions. Regressions are run separately for three groups of firms (Net firms, a random sample of non-Net firms, and IPO-matched non-Net firms), and separately for quarters in which core net income is CNI positive vs. negative. Market value of common equity = f{book equity, net income}. Data are restricted to firm-quarters where pre-income book equity PIBV > 0. Panel A: Net firms, 1997:Q11999:Q2a Quarterly core net income CNI > 0 Quarterly core net income CNI < 0 Data metricb Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0c RPEd SRPEe #obs. Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0 RPE SRPE #obs. Log-linear 1.9f 0.93 0.31 83% 0% 0.75 1.21 165 1.4 0.95 0.29 74% 0% 0.84 1.47 564 [4.9]g (10.0)h (3.6) {0.46} {0.63} [8.2] (22.8) (5.4) {0.52} {0.70} Per-share 35.7 1.13 65.35 13% 0% 1.35 1.51 165 12.5 2.83 7.22 20% 0% 1.62 1.84 564 [9.8] (0.7) (3.4) {0.56} {0.77} [9.2] (5.4) (1.6) {0.62} {0.90} Unscaled 647.2 30.0 174.03 92% 27% 8.43 7.41 165 14.5 6.39 67.46 19% 18% 316.7 4.44 564 [0.6] (12.2) (5.4) {2.07} {1.49} [0.3] (6.4) (2.9) {1.19} {1.38} Panel B: Random sample of non-Net firms, 1997:Q11999:Q2i Quarterly core net income CNI > 0 Quarterly core net income CNI < 0 Data metric Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0 RPE SRPE #obs. Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0 RPE SRPE #obs. Log-linear 1.5 0.62 0.59 90% 0% 0.56 0.79 1838 1.3 0.72 0.35 66% 0% 0.94 1.45 566 [20.9] (32.0) (26.6) {0.36} {0.44} [8.9] (22.1) (6.5) {0.54} {0.81} Per-share 7.4 0.71 21.63 51% 0% 0.91 1.00 1838 5.1 0.85 0.84 22% 0% 1.46 1.64 566 [20.6] (16.3) (21.8) {0.37} {0.46} [13.6] (12.5) (1.2) {0.59} {0.87} Unscaled 268.9 1.52 32.47 75% 12% 4.94 5.27 1838 79.3 1.76 8.18 63% 1% 3.44 3.71 566 [2.8] (12.9) (15.2) {1.08} {1.25} [4.4] (28.9) (4.4) {1.02} {1.51} TABLE 9 (continued) Comparison of parameter estimates and measures of goodness-of-fit from log-linear, per-share and unscaled OLS regressions. Regressions are run separately for three groups of firms (Net firms, a random sample of non-Net firms, and IPO-matched non-Net firms), and separately for quarters in which core net income CNI is positive vs. negative. Market value of common equity = f{book equity, net income}. Data are restricted to firm-quarters where pre-income book equity PIBV > 0. Panel C: IPO-matched non-Net firms, 1997:Q11999:Q2j Quarterly core net income CNI > 0 Quarterly core net income CNI < 0 Data metric Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0 RPE SRPE #obs. Intcpt. PIBV CNI Adj.R2 pM<0 RPE SRPE #obs. Log-linear 2.9 0.35 0.70 73% 0% 0.64 0.97 316 1.2 0.80 0.34 71% 0% 0.60 0.88 161 [13.4] (6.9) (12.4) {0.40} {0.52} [4.8] (12.6) (4.0) {0.42} {0.54} Per-share 14.4 0.02 16.13 9% 0% 0.69 0.80 315 0.9 2.34 5.51 34% 2% 0.83 1.24 161 [19.3] (0.1) (4.6) {0.34} {0.41} [1.3] (8.3) (1.8) {0.50} {0.64} Unscaled 132.7 2.51 3.12 97% < 1% 1.36 2.57 316 27.2 3.04 13.81 91% 14% 1.12 2.20 161 [3.2] (54.0) (11.8) {1.36} {0.67} [2.5] (14.0) (3.4) {0.67} {0.81} a 167 Internet firms publicly traded at the end of one or more of fiscal quarters 1997:Q11999:Q2. b The log-linear log-transposes each variable except LCNI according to LZ = loge[Z + 1], where Z ( 0 is $ millions. LCNI = loge[CNI + 1] < 0. See table 3 for definitions of data items prior to log transformations. The per-share metric deflates PIBV and CNI by the number of common shares outstanding at the end of the fiscal quarter. The unscaled metric is without deflation. c The percentage of predicted (fitted) equity market values that are negative. d RPE = absolute relative pricing error, defined in equation (4) of section 5.8.2 of the text. The mean RPE is given first, with the median RPE in {.}. e SRPE = absolute symmetrized relative pricing error, defined in equation (4) of section 5.8.2 of the text. The mean SRPE is given first, with the median SRPE in {.}. f Mean coefficient on the ten quarter dummies 1997:Q11999:Q2 when no intercept is permitted. g Mean t-statistic on the ten quarter dummy coefficients when no intercept is permitted, multiplied by 10.01/2 = 3.16. h t-statistic relative to a null of zero. i 91 non-Net firms that went public at the same time as the Net firms, and were publicly traded at the end of one or more of fiscal quarters 1997:Q11999:Q2. j 274 non-Net firms randomly selected from the set of NYSE+AMEX+NASDAQ firms reported by CRSP as being publicly traded at the end of 1998, and which were publicly traded at the end of one or more of fiscal quarters 1997:Q11999:Q2.  The Internet literature in law is larger than that in accounting or finance. It can be accessed by searching under abstract & author for Internet or web at  HYPERLINK http://www.wssrn.com. www.wssrn.com.  The current listing of firms in ISDEXTM can be found at  HYPERLINK http://sites.stockpoint.com/internet/isdex.asp http://sites.stockpoint.com/internet/isdex.asp. Frequently asked questions about the ISDEXTM, its selection criteria, etc. are at  HYPERLINK http://www.kcbt.com/isdexfaq.htm http://www.kcbt.com/isdexfaq.htm.  Other items examined include marketshare leadership (measured by revenues) and whether the firm represents the Internet diversity according to our seven subsections of the Internet industry enterprises. These subsections are [1] e-tailers and e-commerce, [2] software, [3] enablers, [4] security, [5] content and portals, [6] high speed and infrastructure, and [7] ISPs and access.  Net stocks tend to be put onto  HYPERLINK http://www.internet.com www.internet.coms IPO Watch!TM list prior to their IPO, followed by the Internet IPO index (IPODEXTM) immediately after they go public. After a month or two of seasoning, they then seem to become eligible to be added to the InternetStockListTM. As of 12/27/99, there were 49 firms listed on IPO Watch!TM, 48 on the IPODEXTM, and 281 on the InternetStockListTM.  For example,  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com reports that its database of Internet companies numbered 580 on 1/5/2000. However, they do not report how they define an Internet company. As a result, their list contains firms such as MCI/Worldcom and Microsoft that are arguably not true Net firms. The Excel file containing the  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com www.marketguide.com list is freely available at  HYPERLINK http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/RESEARCH/jan2000/NETLROT.XLS. www.marketguide.com/mgi/RESEARCH/jan2000/NETLROT.XLS.  For example, characteristics such as institutional holdings, analyst ratings and analyst following are plausibly dependent on the length of time the firm has been publicly traded.  This allows one to copy a web page into an Excel worksheet. Selected items can then be located and saved.  A positive growth rate from a negative base figure (as is the case for most Net firms) is clearly problematic. Attempts to determine exactly what analysts mean when they forecast positive EPS growths for Net companies have proved unsuccessful.  The key theory papers are Ohlson (1995) and Feltham and Ohlson (1995, 1996). Major examples of empirical work are Barth, Beaver and Landsman (1998), Dechow, Hutton and Sloan (1999), Frankel and Lee (1998), Hand and Landsman (1999), Harris and Kemsley (1999), Lee, Myers and Swaminathan (1999).  Amir and Lev find that earnings and book equity become value-relevant when non-financial data is controlled for.  Ohlson (1999) demonstrates that accounting-based valuation models can capture the impact of information that is not yet in current financial statements (which could include, but not be limited to, page views, unique visitors etc.) via analyst forecasts of future earnings. I deliberately choose not to do this because I want to measure the value-relevance of accounting data for Net firms in a conservative manner.  To the extent that increasing-returns-to-scale imply increasing abnormal economic profits relative to capital employed, the winner-takes-all model in expectation violates a crucial tenet of competitive product and capital markets. This is that in expectation a firms long-run return on capital employed will equal its cost of equity capital. Alternatively stated, a firm cannot in expectation earn a positive abnormal return on equity in the long-run. See Hand (2000c) for further discussion of this issue in the context of Internet firms.  Log-linear models have been employed extensively in economics. Kaplan and Ruback (1995) and Berger, Ofek and Swary (1996) are two rare instances of the use of log-linear models in valuation contexts in finance.  The results of running conventional regressions based on unscaled and per-share data are reported in section 5.6.2.  The market value of equity is measured at the end of the fiscal quarter. This is typically three weeks before the firm confirms its net income to the market via a quarterly earnings press release. Based on other empirical work that estimates accounting-based valuation models, I do not expect the look-ahead bias that this may create in the upcoming regressions to be material.  Clean surplus accounting under U.S. GAAP requires that book equity at the end of the quarter includes net income. As a result, if unadjusted book equity and net income are both included in a regression as independent variables, then the marginal impact of net income is a function of both the coefficients on net income and book equity. Replacing book equity with pre-income book equity finesses this complexity. Note that if under clean surplus accounting, pre-income book equity is book equity at the beginning of the quarter plus new equity issued less equity repurchased less dividends declared during the quarter.  Linearity between log-transformed X and Y does not guarantee that the relation between X and Y is non-linear. Per equation (3), the relation between X and Y is non-linear when X ( 0 if ( ( 1. When X < 0, non-linearity ( ( ( 1.  Few observations were lost by restricting pre-income book equity to be positive. Including such observations has an immaterial effect on results for Net firms, as well as the two control groups of non-Net firms examined in section 5.8.2.  In some cases, selling and marketing expenses were not separately broken out of SG&A in the Net firms income statement. Where possible, such observations were backfilled by setting selling and marketing expenses to total revenues multiplied by the sample median value for firms ratio of selling and marketing expenses to revenues.  Although decomposition is not exact, residual expenses defined as EXP COGS GA RD MKTG are small.  This is not to say that non-financial information is unconditionally or conditionally value-irrelevant. For example, suppose that the adjusted R2 statistic is 90% in table 5 when non-financial information is the only explanatory variable, and that the adjusted R2 increases to 91% when both financial and non-financial information are in the regression. What can be said in such a situation is that 84% of the cross-sectional variation in Net firms equity market values is explained by information common to the financial and non-financial variables; 1% is uniquely explained by financial information; and 6% is uniquely explained by non-financial information.  The intercept is a scaling factor, and the multiplicative error term exhibits variation which is proportional to the magnitude of the dependent variable.  Recall from table 4 that selling and marketing expenses are a mean (median) of 80% (54%) of revenues when core net income is negative, while when core net income is positive, selling and marketing expenses are a much lower mean (median) of 28% (25%) of revenues.  Each intercept is the mean of the ten calendar quarter dummy coefficient estimates obtained when no unit vector is included in the regression (/NOINT in PROC REG in SAS). The associated t-statistic is the mean of the ten calendar quarter dummy t-statistics, multiplied by the square root of ten to adjust for degrees of freedom. T-statistics of similar magnitudes are obtained if no calendar quarter dummies are included in the regressions.  It should be noted that this approach relies on the assumption that a Net firm with zero book equity and zero income (or zero revenues and zero expenses) has a zero market value. This may be incorrect if accounting is biased in capturing economic events, as in the conservative accounting under GAAP for research and development and/or selling and marketing costs.  The number of IPO-matched non-Net firms in panel C of table 9 (n = 91) is less than the n = 213 reported in tables 1 and 2 because many Net firms (against which non-Net firms are matched) went public during the 2nd half of 1999.  The adjusted R2 statistic depends on the variances of the independent variablse. As noted by Ye (1998), in general, given the same data generation mechanism, the higher the variances of the independent variables, the higher is the adjusted R2.  For example, suppose that M = $100 and that two predicted prices M1 = $150 and M2 = $50 are being evaluated. Each predicted price deviates from the actual price by $50, and yields an RPE of 0.5. However, M1 is overpriced by 33.3%, while M2 is underpriced by 100%. The symmetrized RPE corrects for this. The SRPE for M1 is 1, while the SRPE for M2 is 0.5.  Using annual data from 19631994, Ye (1998) finds a negative elasticity on log-transformed negative net income.  Net dividends are cash dividends plus repurchases of stock less issuances of stock.  There is reason to believe that the extent to which the assumption that net dividends are zero may be small. For example, Hand and Landsman (1999) report that of the 6,330 firms in the Compustat population in fiscal 1996, only 31% paid cash dividends. No Net firms have ever paid cash dividends, and very few have repurchased stock. However, casual empiricism suggests that Net firms issue equity much more frequently than do non-Net firms. PAGE  PAGE 22 PAGE  PAGE 27 PAGE  PAGE 38 PAGE  PAGE 43 PAGE  PAGE 45 ?@   M P Q  . cEX9F2  M##e%t%%-&-(-E-F-T----콧››j0JB*H*OJQJU6B*OJQJ6B*5B*OJQJ jOJQJB*CJOJQJ 6OJQJOJQJB*>*B*OJQJ 0JOJQJjB*OJQJUjB*OJQJU B*OJQJ CJOJQJ CJOJQJ3?@ABCr        $ p$$dh %  !$$d %d &d 'd ?@ABCr     M N O P   - . c3G M###&'*+'-E-F-T-U-0\588 9 9====M@N@j@iqr\: M N O P   - . c3G M###&'*+'-E-F-T-U-0\5@&dhdhdh @ ------2.3.V.W.X.h.i.....///[/]/j/k///////>0@0R0S0v0w0x000000000M1d11ڹճڥ՝ڏځ՝y6B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJUjB*OJQJUCJH*OJQJjB*OJQJU H*OJQJjIB*OJQJUjB*OJQJUOJQJ B*OJQJ 0JOJQJjB*OJQJUjB*OJQJU/1111111111o2p22222333K4P4R44444444444Z5[5 6 6c7d777777777!8#8888885B*OJQJjB*OJQJUB*H*OJQJj6B*OJQJUjmB*OJQJUj0JB*H*OJQJU 0JOJQJjB*OJQJUjB*OJQJU B*OJQJCJH*OJQJOJQJ4\588 9 9====M@N@j@k@GCFFFFI]LPPGPHPR T TdT@&dhdh8 9::;;;;; < <<<6<7<8<J<K<==???????@@K@L@N@j@FFFFMM OPPGP TdTUWWWWW_YB*CJOJQJOJQJB*CJOJQJjb B*OJQJUB*H*OJQJ5B*OJQJjB*OJQJU 0JOJQJjB*OJQJUjB*OJQJUj0JB*H*OJQJU B*OJQJ6B*OJQJ3j@k@GCFFFFI]LPPGPHPR T TdTeTUWWWaY&[\[\\\^^^^x_ aIabbbdfifjf(g{iiik3l}l~lKozo{owtxtttx{{||?}@}~~~~34QRH#ەܕęWXop*ò4./0EFWXddTeTUWWWaY&[\[\\\^^^^x_ aIab  ! xP  ! #Pdh dh !  ! #xPdh_Y`YZZZZZ[[&[J\Q\Z\6^7^^^^^w_/a?abbbfif(gzi{i|iiiikelrl}l~lJoMoboooyo{owtxttt{{{{||||||||붲ƨB*H*OJQJB*CJOJQJ6B*CJOJQJ6B*66B*OJQJ 6OJQJOJQJ 0JOJQJj7 B*OJQJUjB*OJQJU B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJU@BFG& jbB*H*OJQJ jaB*H*OJQJ jB*OJQJ jbB*OJQJ jaB*OJQJB*H*OJQJ jB*OJQJ6B*OJQJ B*OJQJE&',-PQabvẁ̀ҀӀ&',-WXabcd12DE;ەtuj B*OJQJUjB*OJQJU>*B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJUOJQJB*H*OJQJ jbB*OJQJ B*OJQJ6B*OJQJDەܕęWXop*ò4./0EFWX4dh@&™ÙXolmOPͪΪpxгѳ%&23{|ɴʴմִ۴ܴklQU jpB*H*OJQJ jB*OJQJ jpB*OJQJ jbB*OJQJ>*B*OJQJB*H*OJQJ6B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJU B*OJQJjB*OJQJU 0JOJQJ= -./ETU'()*/0CDEGZ[\]jkzrbjH < CJOJQJUVmHB*H*OJQJj B*EHOJQJUjۓ < CJOJQJUVmHj1B*EHOJQJUj& < CJOJQJUVmHj B*EHOJQJUj8 < CJOJQJUVmHjB*OJQJU6B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJU B*OJQJB*H*OJQJ%X4ab/bcrp#A| !",1245MRSUVfklnow|}    ^ab/bcrp#A|$@&$$@&dh H%dh@&()@| 12RSkl|}#$;<TUdeⲥ5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH 6B*OJQJOJQJ5B*OJQJj0JB*H*OJQJU B*OJQJjB*OJQJUj`B*EHOJQJUA !",<LPL$$ h $$$$,1245MRSUVfklnow|}dD`H$$$$ h $ #$\pT`t`$$$$$ h  #$'(6;<?@OTUXY_dehi~ !&'*+@EFIJUZ[^_rwx{| c$'(6;<?@OTUXY_dehi~d@|XT$$ h $$$ Hl`Xt$$ h $$$ &'EFZ[wx45QRij|}67KLcd{|56YZxy&'@A5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH Z!&'*+@EFIJUZ[^_rwx{||TtT$$$$ h $/4pHtl$$$$ h $/4589LQRUVdijmnw|}167:;EKLOP^cdghv{| c4589LQRUVdijmnw|}t`LX@`$$$$$ h `@`xx$$ h $$$167:;EKLOP^cdghv{|T``H<$$ h $$$l\tPt$$$$ h $ !0569:TYZ]^sxy|} !&'*+;@ADELQRUV\abefv{| c !0569:TYZ]^sxy|}d|``$$$$ h $ !&'PPl`h$$$$$ h '*+;@ADELQRUV\abefv{|D@hdX$$ h $$$AQRab{|01LM_`no$%89HIYZyz$%=>VWno*+>?XYmn5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH Z+0145GLMPQZ_`cdinors $%()389<=CHILMT c`LXT`$$ h $$$+0145GLMPQZ_`cdinors`pL<\$$$$ h $`|XTx$$$$ h $ $%()389<=CHILMTYZ]^tyz|P@DX$$$$$ h TYZ]^tyz}~$%)*8=>BCQVW[\inost %*+/09>?CD cz}~h\$$ h $$$$%)*8=>BCQVW[\inostdd`L$$ h $$$ PLXT$$$$ h $%*+/09>?CDSXY]^hmnrsHPhTt$$$$ h $DSXY]^hmnrs!&'+,7<=ABNSTXYbghlm{5:;? cn&'<=STgh:;RSwx /0KLkl,-AB_`pq5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH Zdd\<$$$$$ h !&'+,7<=ABNSTXYbghlm{X\PdL$$ h $$$HpXp$$ h $$$5:;?@MRSWXrwx|}`LX$$$$ h $?@MRSWXrwx|}  !*/045FKLPQfklpq ',- c TTDPl$$$$ h $  !*/045FKLPQfklpqDPp|`$$$$$ h  `Ph$$ h $$$',-12<ABFGZ_`dekpquvTxDP`$$ h $$$-12<ABFGZ_`dekpquv "'(,-:?@DEMRSWXjoptu  c "Ll`$$$$ h $'(?@RSop&'@AVWjk&'<=LMcd56RSgh~23KL5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH Z"'(,-:?@DEMRSWXjoptu`LtXh$$$$ h $ `L`lLX$$$$$ h !&'+,;@AEFQVW[\ejkop !&'+,7<=ABGLMQR^cdhi  c!&'+,;@AEFQVW[\ejkophXPpP$$ h $$$ TxtP$$ h $$$!&'+,7<=ABGLMQR^cdhiX@\$$$$ h $ /5H\Tt$$$$ h $/56:;MRSWXbghlmy~-2378FKLPQlqrvw c56:;MRSWXbghlmy~tT\HX$$$$$ h -237Tlhd$$ h $$$78FKLPQlqrvw\PH$$ h $$$Lqr56KLdeyz  #$@AUVgh89LMbc*+CD^_xy5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH Z!"056:;Fl\hdX$$$$ h $!"056:;FKLPQ_deijtyz~  #$();@AEFPUVZ[bghlm cFKLPQ_deijtyz~dT`L$$$$ h $  #$();@AL|L`tT$$$$$ h AEFPUVZ[bghlmHtp$$ h $$$#$389=>GLMQR`xhPX$$ h $$$#$389=>GLMQR]bcghz %*+/0>CDHIY^_cdsxy}~  "'   bR]bcghzthtTx$$$$ h $ %*+/0>CDHIY^_cdsx`dlh$$$$ h $xy}~  t\@p $$$$$$ h   '(EFbcwx -.@AWXlm()>?QRT_` ( (((l(m(o(CCCCC$D%D 5OJQJ5B*CJOJQJhnH 5B*OJQJ B*OJQJ5B*CJ OJQJhnH 5B*CJ OJQJhnH L "'(,-@EFJK]bcghrwx|}xtTdD$$ h $$$'(,-@EFJK]bcghrwx|}  !"(-.23;@AEFRWX\]glmqr   bP\DP\ $$$ h $$$  !"(-.23;@AEFRWX\]gPDL\T$$$$ h $glmqr||tP$$$$ h $#()-.:>?CDLQRST_`¼~  \   ]   _ `  d   o   p   r s  w                        6  0#()-.:>?CDLQRST_\HXL$@&dh$$$$$ h _`XLL|$$ h $$$$$-2356RWXZ[hmnpqysmic]WQ                                                     *   +   - .  3   I   J   L M  R -2356RWXZ[hmnpqXlhh$$ h $$$     * / 0 3 4 @ dltX $$$$$ h $     * / 0 3 4 @ E F I J Y \ ] }wqmga[UQ                 ,   -   0 1  6   I   J   M N  S   d   e   h i  m   }   ~                @ E F I J Y \ ] ` a |                 \xl$$$$ h $] ` a |                             }wsmga[WQ  L M  R   c   d   g h  l   ~                                                                     , 1 2 5 6 L P Q T U j n o llx|x|$$$$$ h   , 1 2 5 6 L P Q T U j n o r s                }ysmga]WQ                                                           *   +   . /  4   H   I o r s                         h$$ h $$$           ( - . 1 2 H L M P Q j o p s t       ysmgc]WQ                                      .   /   2 3  8   O   P   S T  Y   i   j   m n  s      ( - . 1 2 H L M P Q j o p s t           |\h$$ h $$$                    ! & ' * + A F G J K ^ c ysmic]WQ                 5   6   9 :  ?   U   V   Y Z  _   {   |                                               ! & ' * + A F G J K ^ t$$$$ h $^ c d g h }                      |T||$$$$ h $c d g h }                            ýysoic]WSI  N   _   `   c d  h   ~                                                                ( - . 1 2 H M N Q R ^ a b e f    lXPd$$$$$ h    ( - . 1 2 H M N Q R ^ a b e f               }wsmga[WQ                                                        .   /   2 3  8   D   E   H                      $%(|T$$ h $$$          $%()49:=>V[\_`x|}}ysmga]WQ                       "   #   & '  ,   7   8   ; <  @   V   W   Z [  `   w   x   { |         ()49:=>V[\_`x|}|p$$ h $$$-1256Fysmgc]WQ  *   +   . /  3   I   J   M N  R   k   l   o p  u                                        -1256FKLOPZ\|hL$$$$ h $FKLOPZ^_bc}ysmic]WQ  y                                                                         Z^_bc}Thh$$$$ h $ 1569:MQRUVnstwxýysoic]WS                                         &   '   * +  /   I   J   M N  S   o   p   s t 1569:MQRUVnstwxp$$$$$ h "'(+\T$$ h $$$"'(+,DIJMN^cdg}wsmga[WQ                    4   5   8 9  >   X   Y   \ ]  `   m   n   q r  v                      +,DIJMN^cdghtyz}~hXxP|$$ h $$$ghtyz}~}ysmga]WQ  \   _ `  d   p   q   t u  y                                                       6;<?@PThh$$$$ h $6;<?@PUVYZpstwxysmgc]WQ                                                     !   $ %  *   A   B   E F  I   [ PUVYZpstwxxl$$$$ h $056:;UYZ^_txy}~ysmic]WQ                             %   &   * +  0   F   G   K L  P   g   h   k l  p             056:;UYZ^_txy}~|p$$$$$ h &*+/0JOPýysoic]WS     0   1   5 6  :   E   F   J K  O   d   e   i j  o                                  &*+/t|T$$ h $$$/0JOPTUostxypx$$ h $$$PTUostxy }wsmga[WQ  N O  T   f   g   k l  p                                                           )./34BFGKLdijnott`|$$$$ h $)./34BFGKLdijno}ysmga]WQ                                                           ,   -   1 2  7   I   J  ,1$$$$ h $ ,1267BGHLMchimn}ysmgc]WQ                                      )   *   . /  4   K   L   P Q  V   l   m   q r  w    1267BGHLMchimn}Xd`|$$$$$ h   #$=Aysmic]WQ  #   <   =   A B  F   U   V   Z [  _   k   l   p q  u                                       #$=ABFXXdP$$ h $$$ABFGQUVZ[puvz{ýysoic]WSe  i                                                                      FGQUVZ[puvz{t$$ h $$$!"5:;?@JNOSTlqrvwxP$$$$ h $!"5:;?@JNOSTlqrvw}wsmga[WQ                                               !   % &  +   >   ?   C D  I   _   `   d 05tp$$$$ h $056:;RVW[\nrswx}ysmga]WQ                       %   &   * +  0   F   G   K L  Q   b   c   g h  l                   56:;RVW[\nrswxplxp$$$$$ h x ,/045Mysmgc]WQ  +   ,   0 1  4   K   L   P Q  U   m   n   r s  x                                         ,/045MRSWXpuvz|$$ h $$$MRSWXpuvz{ ysmic]WQ  S   k   l   p q  v                                                             z{ T$$ h $$$156:;SWX\]joptuýysoic]WS                                                     %   &   * +  /   H   I   M N156:;SWX\]joptu`Th|$$$$ h $ %&*+EJKOP`epl$$$$ h $ %&*+EJKOP`efjk}wsmga[WQ                                5   6   : ;  @   [   \   ` a  e   w   x   | }            efjk\h$$$$$ h !"&'BGHLM}ysmga]WQ           9   :   > ?  D   ]   ^   b c  h   ~                                        !"&'BGHLM^cdhipX$$ h $$$M^cdhiysmgc]WQ  Y   Z   ^ _  d                                                                "#167;<pdT$$ h $$$"#167;<FKLPQkpquvysmic]WQ                                                     $   %   ) *  /   =   >   B C  G <FKLPQkpquv$$$$ h $167;<JOPTUlpquvýysoic]WS                             $   %   ) *  /   F   G   K L  P   ^   _   c d  h          167;<JOPTUlpquv`d$$$$ h $    ! & ' `ld$$$$$ h     ! & ' + , D I J N }wsmga[WQ        4   5   9 :  ?   Y   Z   ^ _  d   r   s   w x  }                                  ' + , D I J N O c g h l m { ~             x\t$$ h $$$N O c g h l m { ~                      !!}ysmga]WQ  `   d e  j   v   w   { |                                                                   !! !!!!!.!3!4!8!9!T!X!Y!]!^!\Lx$$ h $$$! !!!!!.!3!4!8!9!T!X!Y!]!^!q!v!w!{!|!!!!!!!!!!!!ysmgc]WQ                                                  '   (   , -  2   L   M   Q R  V   _ ^!q!v!w!{!|!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"""""xX$$$$ h $!!!!!!"""""""""3"8"9"=">"H"L"M"Q"R"k"p"q"u"v"""ysmic]WQ                             "   #   ' (  -   D   E   I J  N   Z   [   _ `  e   }   ~       """""3"8"9"=">"H"L"M"Q"R"k"p"q"u"v""""""""Pt$$$$ h $""""""""""""""""""""#######$#(#)#B#G#H#ýysoic]WS     7   8   < =  A   Y   Z   ^ _  d   z   {                                        """""""""""""""#######$#(#)#B#G#H#pX$$$$$ h H#L#M#f#j#k#o#p#####################$$$ $}wsmga[WQ  Z [  `   t   u   y z  ~                                                          H#L#M#f#j#k#o#p####################T||$$ h $$$##$$$ $ $"$'$($,$-$H$M$N$R$S$^$c$d$h$i$$$$$$X\$$ h $$$ $ $"$'$($,$-$H$M$N$R$S$^$c$d$h$i$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$}ysmga]WQ                                                           3   4   8 9  >   U   V $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$%%%%%+%dl$$$$ h $$$$$$$$$$$$%%%%%+%0%1%5%6%O%S%T%X%Y%q%v%w%{%|%%ysmgc]WQ                          *   +   / 0  5   E   F   J K  P   e   f   j k  o                +%0%1%5%6%O%S%T%X%Y%q%v%w%{%|%%%%%%%%%%%%%`hp$$$$ h $%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% &&&&&,&0&ysmic]WQ  4   L   M   Q R  W   f   g   k l  q                                                 %%%%%%%%%%%%%% &&&&&,&0&1&5&6&E&I&J&\dhd$$$$$ h 0&1&5&6&E&I&J&N&O&i&n&o&s&t&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&ýysoic]WS{                                                                 *   +   / 0J&N&O&i&n&o&s&t&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&h\|$$ h $$$&&&&'' ' ''$'%')'*'7'<'='A'B'\'a'b'f'g'x'}'~'''''''}wsmga[WQ                                      # $  )   6   7   ; <  A   V   W   [ \  a   u   v   z &&&'' ' ''$'%')'*'7'<'='A'B'\'a'b'f'g'x'}'~'''`p$$ h $$$'''''''''''''''''''''( ( ( ( (h\T$$$$ h $'''''''''''''''''( ( ( ( (((l(m(n(o(q(r((((~zvpjd^Y                   T UV  Z   e   f   j k  o   |   }                          (((l(m(n(o(q(r(((((((((((((((((xpt$$ h2 $$$$$$@&(((((((((((((((((())) ) )&)+),).)/)7)<)=)ſysnhb\VQ                                   4   5   7  8   =   Q   R   T  U   Z   m   n   p  q   u          ((((())) ) )&)+),).)/)7)<)=)?)@)Q)V)W)Y)Z)s)x)Dh$$$$ h2 $=)?)@)Q)V)W)Y)Z)s)x)y)|)}))))))))))))))))* * *ſysnhb\VQ       3   4   7  8   =   [   \   _  `   d                                                    x)y)|)}))))))))))))))))* * * **,*1*2*h$$$$$ h2  * **,*1*2*5*6*T*X*Y*\*]*y*~*****************ſysnhb\VQ :   ?   V   W   Z  [   `   |   }                                                            2*5*6*T*X*Y*\*]*y*~******************h$$ h2 $$$***+++ + +(+-+.+1+2+M+R+S+V+W+g+l+m+p+q+++++++++ſysnhb\VQ                                                                             5   6   9 **+++ + +(+-+.+1+2+M+R+S+V+W+g+l+m+p+q++++++hpH$$ h2 $$$+++++++++++++++++,,,,",',(,+,,,@,|x$$$$ h2 $++++++++++++++,,,,",',(,+,,,@,E,F,I,J,c,h,i,ſysnhb\VQ                                                 ;   <   ?  @   E   [   \   _  `   d   z   {   ~ @,E,F,I,J,c,h,i,l,m,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,hlP$$$$ h2 $i,l,m,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-------ſysnhb\VQ                     =   >   A  B   G   Q   R   U  V   [   w   x   {  |                           ,,,,,---------4-9-:-=->-V-[-\-_-`----h|$$$$$ h2 ---4-9-:-=->-V-[-\-_-`-------------------ſysnhb\VQ 7   <   Q   R   U  V   [   j   k   n  o   t                                                    -------------------.....#.$.'.d||$$ h2 $$$----.....#.$.'.(.?.D.E.H.I.^.c.d.g.h.........ſysnhb\VQ w   {                                                                         2   3   6 '.(.?.D.E.H.I.^.c.d.g.h................|p$$ h2 $$$............. /////1/6/7/:/;/L/P/Q/T/U/h/m/n/ſysnhb\VQ                                                 %   &   )  *   /   H   I   L  M   Q   r   s   v ...... /////1/6/7/:/;/L/P/Q/T/U/h/m/n/q/r//|htx$$$$ h2 $n/q/r//////////////////////////000ſysnhb\VQ       "   #   &  '   ,   8   9   <  =   B   V   W   Z  [   `   u   v   y  z                           /////////////////////////00P|xXP$$$$ h2 $00 0 0#0(0)0,0-0H0M0N0Q0R0e0j0k0n0o0}00000000t``$$$$$ h2 0 0 0#0(0)0,0-0H0M0N0Q0R0e0j0k0n0o0}0000000000000ſysnhb\VQ ]   b   p   q   t  u   z                                                                  0000000000000000001 1111!1&1'1*1dPd$$ h2 $$$00000000000001 1111!1&1'1*1+1A1F1G1J1K1f1k1l1ſysnhb\VQ                                                            $   4   5   8  9   >   X   Y   \ *1+1A1F1G1J1K1f1k1l1o1p1111111111111111x$$ h2 $$$l1o1p1111111111111111111112222252:2;2ſysnhb\VQ                           "  #   (   D   E   H  I   N   b   c   f  g   k                        1111112222252:2;2>2?2U2Z2[2^2_2|222222|P$$$$ h2 $;2>2?2U2Z2[2^2_2|22222222222222222222222ſysnhb\VQ (   ,   F   G   J  K   P   `   a   d  e   j                                                    22222222222222222222333332363h$$$$ h2 $22233333236373:3;3W3\3]3`3a3~3333333333333ſysnhb\VQ Q   V   p   q   t  u   x                                                           #   $   ' 6373:3;3W3\3]3`3a3~333333333333333333$$$$$ h2 33333333444"4#4146474:4;4M4R4S4V4W4l4q4r4u4v4444ſysnhb\VQ                                                               !   "   %  &   +   L   M   P 333444"4#4146474:4;4M4R4S4V4W4l4q4r4u4v44444`p|l$$ h2 $$$444444444444444444455 5 55555585<5=5ſysnhb\VQ                                   /   0   4  5   :   D   E   I  J   O   `   a   d  e   j   {   |    44444444444444444455 5 555555lTT$$ h2 $$$585<5=5A5B5V5Z5[5_5`5}5555555555555555x\$$$$ h2 $=5A5B5V5Z5[5_5`5}55555555555555555555566ſysnhb\VQ       1   2   6  7   <   H   I   M  N   S   m   n   r  s   w                                      55555566 6 6666"6#6A6F6G6K6L6\6a6b6f6g6w6{6dlh$$$$ h2 $6 6 6666"6#6A6F6G6K6L6\6a6b6f6g6w6{6|66666666666ſysnhb\VQ [   _   s   t   x  y   ~                                                                  {6|666666666666666666666667 7 7xl\h$$$$$ h2 66666666666667 7 777/7475797:7O7T7U7Y7Z7t7y7z7ſysnhb\VQ                                                 #   $   (  )   .   :   ;   ?  @   E   U   V   Z  777/7475797:7O7T7U7Y7Z7t7y7z7~77777777777hl$$ h2 $$$z7~7777777777777777777777 88888(8-8.8ſysnhb\VQ                           "  #   (   9   :   >  ?   C   T   U   Y  Z   _                        777777777777 88888(8-8.82838F8K8L8P8Q8phtxX$$ h2 $$$.82838F8K8L8P8Q8\8a8b8f8g8888888888888888888ſysnhb\VQ %   *   F   G   K  L   Q   j   k   o  p   u                                                    Q8\8a8b8f8g8888888888888888888889$$$$ h2 $88899999<9A9B9F9G9T9Y9Z9^9_9q9u9v9z9{999999999ſysnhb\VQ l   q                                                                               $ 99999<9A9B9F9G9T9Y9Z9^9_9q9u9v9z9{99999999`p|d$$$$ h2 $99999999999999:::::):.:/:3:4:N:R:S:thl$$$$$ h2 9999999999999:::::):.:/:3:4:N:R:S:W:X:h:m:n:ſysnhb\VQ                                                       !  "   '   F   G   K  L   Q   f   g   k S:W:X:h:m:n:r:s::::::::::::::::::::||`\$$ h2 $$$n:r:s::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;ſysnhb\VQ                  #   /   0   4  5   :   G   H   L  M   R   f   g   k  l   q                        :::::;;;;;!;";7;<;=;A;B;X;];^;b;c;w;|;};;;||$$ h2 $$$;!;";7;<;=;A;B;X;];^;b;c;w;|;};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;ſysnhb\VQ 3   7   W   X   \  ]   b   x   y   }  ~                                                       ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;<<<<!<&<'<+<,<?<ht$$$$ h2 $;;;;<<<<!<&<'<+<,<?<C<D<H<I<_<d<e<i<j<<<<<<<<<ſysnhb\VQ q   v                                                                         -   .   2 ?<C<D<H<I<_<d<e<i<j<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<$$$$ h2 $<<<<<<<<<<<<<=====9===>=B=C=P=U=V=Z=[=t=y=z=ſysnhb\VQ                                                       $  %   *   E   F   J  K   P   k   l   p <<<<=====9===>=B=C=P=U=V=Z=[=t=y=z=~=====`$$$$$ h2 z=~====================>>>>>!>">7>;><>ſysnhb\VQ                                "   /   0   4  5   :   T   U   Y  Z   _   y   z   ~               ================>>>>>!>">7>;><>@>`|d$$ h2 $$$<>@>A>O>T>U>Y>Z>s>w>x>|>}>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>???ſysnhb\VQ       +   ,   0  1   6   R   S   W  X   ]   z   {                                              @>A>O>T>U>Y>Z>s>w>x>|>}>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>|$$ h2 $$$>??? ? ?(?-?.?2?3?N?S?T?X?Y?e?i?j?n?o???????Xp|$$$$ h2 $? ? ?(?-?.?2?3?N?S?T?X?Y?e?i?j?n?o??????????????ſysnhb\VQ P   T   o   p   t  u   z                                                                  ??????????????? @@@@@,@1@2@6@7@E@I@`$$$$ h2 $???????? @@@@@,@1@2@6@7@E@I@J@N@O@_@d@e@i@j@z@@@ſysnhb\VQ                                                               &   '   +  ,   1   J   K   O I@J@N@O@_@d@e@i@j@z@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ll|$$$$$ h2 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@AA A A#A(A)A-A.ABAGAHAſysnhb\VQ                                   3   4   8  9   >   T   U   Y  Z   ^   s   t   x  y   ~          @@@@AA A A#A(A)A-A.ABAGAHALAMAXA]A^AbAcAoAtAuAyA|X\$$ h2 $$$HALAMAXA]A^AbAcAoAtAuAyAzAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAſysnhb\VQ #   (   E   F   J  K   P   g   h   l  m   r   y   z   ~                                           yAzAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BBBBBH`$$ h2 $$$AAA BBBBB-B1B2B6B7BNBRBSBWBXBlBoBpBtBuBBBBBBBBBſysnhb\VQ Z   _   }   ~                                                                         " B-B1B2B6B7BNBRBSBWBXBlBoBpBtBuBBBBBBBBBBBBtp$$$$ h2 $BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCC C C C Cſysnhb\VQ                                                       !  "   (   8   9   =  >   C   T   U   Y BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCC C C Cp$$$$ h2 $ C C CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC C!C"C#C$C%C$$$$$ h2  C CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC C!C"C#C$C%C&C'C(C)C*Cſysnhb\VQ                                                                                    %C&C'C(C)C*C+C,C-C.C/C0C1C2C3C4C5C6C7C8C9C:C;CC?C$$ h2 $$$*C+C,C-C.C/C0C1C2C3C4C5C6C7C8C9C:C;CC?C@CACBCCCDCECFCGCHCſysnhb\VQ                                                                                    ?C@CACBCCCDCECFCGCHCICJCKCLCMCNCOCPCQCRCSCTCUCVCWCXCYC$$ h2 $$$HCICJCKCLCMCNCOCPCQCRCSCTCUCVCWCXCYCZC[C\C]C^C_C`CaCbCcCdCeCfCſysnhb\VQ                                                                                    YCZC[C\C]C^C_C`CaCbCcCdCeCfCgChCiCjCkClCmCnCoCpCqCrCsC$$$$ h2 $fCgChCiCjCkClCmCnCoCpCqCrCsCtCuCvCwCxCyCzC{C|C}C~CCCCCCCſysnhb\VQ                                                                                    sCtCuCvCwCxCyCzC{C|C}C~CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC$$$$ h2 $CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCſysnhb\VQ x   y   z   {   |  }   ~                                                                  CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC$$$$$ h2 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCý}wqlf`ZTO Z   [   \   ]   ^  _   `   a   b   c  d   e   f   g   h  i   j   k   l   m  n   o   p   q   r  s   t   u   v   w CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC$$$ h2  $$$$CCCC$D%DbFFFFFXGwGxGHHHHHJYJZJyJJJFKKKKKHLILhLiL-M8M9MMNOOhPPtQRRMSS@TT UUCVV&WW*XX8YZZ2[[t~$b~W]T Y >CCC$D%DbFFFFFXGwGxGHHHHHJ@& ! @& !H$ dh@& H$ dh@& !H$ @& ! dh@& !dh@&dh@&@&$@&%DEEEE`FaFFFFFFFFFFFGG2G3G4G5GYGZGmGnGoGpGwGxGGGHHHHHHHHHHwljEHOJQJUj4< CJOJQJUVmHjEHOJQJUj0< CJOJQJUVmHj9EHOJQJUjk%< CJOJQJUVmH CJOJQJjYEHOJQJUjk%< CJOJQJUVmHjOJQJUj0JH*OJQJU H*OJQJOJQJ*HHHHHHHHHbIcIdIIIIIJJ[J\JoJpJqJrJzJ{J}J~JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ K Ksj >< CJOJQJUVmHj5&EHOJQJUj<< CJOJQJUVmH jOJQJj"EHOJQJUj<< CJOJQJUVmH H*OJQJ jh6OJQJjg EHOJQJUjQ5< CJOJQJUVmHjOJQJU CJOJQJOJQJ,JYJZJyJJJFKKKKKHLILhLiL-M8M9MMN hdx !H dh@& !H$ dh@& !@&dh@&@& dh@& H$@& !dh@& K KKKKK$K%K&K'KCKDKkKlKKKKKKKKK3L4LJLKL^L_L`LaLhLiLoLpL-M8MMMmN޻޵ޥޓ޵ރxޓoic 6OJQJ B*OJQJ ja6OJQJj0EHOJQJUjEA< CJOJQJUVmH CJOJQJj-.EHOJQJUj?< CJOJQJUVmH H*OJQJ jrOJQJj,EHOJQJUj>< CJOJQJUVmHOJQJ j~OJQJjOJQJUj)EHOJQJU&mNNNNOGP\PHQiQQ RRRS?SySzSSSSSSVVWWWWWXXXY*YYYYYYZZmZZ[1[^\h\)_R_T____&`(`h`i`k`l`v`w`` CJOJQJ5 j5U5H*OJQJ 5OJQJjV4B*OJQJU 0JOJQJj3B*OJQJUjB*OJQJU6B*OJQJ B*OJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ=NOOhPPtQRRMSS@TT UUCVV&WW*XX8YZZ2[[9\y\] E< hdx[9\y\]]O^^T_____g`h`j`k`v`w````a;a*CJH*OJQJ>*CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ CJOJQJCJH*CJ 5CJH*5CJ5CJ5CJ CJOJQJJaaaabEbNbWb`bybbbbbbbbbbbbbc c?cHcQcZccclc!bbbbbbbbbbbc c?cHcQcZccclcccccc d.d7dGdPdpdyddddĿ~ytoje`[!!!!!!$!4!=!`!!!!!!!!!!#!,!a!j!s!|!!!!!!!!!!lcccccc d.d7dGdPdpdyddddddee"eeeeffffLfMf!$!dddee"eeeeffffLfMfgfkfffffg gegngwgggggggggĿ~ytoje`[!!!!!!!!!!!K!T!!!!!!!!!L!T!U!V!~!!!I!Y!k!}!!!Mfgfkfffffg gegngwgggggggggggg hhh$h-hlhuh!gggg hhh$h-hlhuh~hhhhhhh2i;isiiiiiijj6jOjijjjjĿ~ytoje`[!!!!!5!U!i!r!!!!!!0!9!q!z!!!!!!!!>!G!P!Y!b!!!!!uh~hhhhhhh2i;isiiiiiijj6jOjijjjjj?kkkkk!$!jj?kkkkkk l l%l)l0l7l>lElXl_lflmltl{llllllllllm mmĿ~ytoje`[!^!e!l!s!z!!!!!!!!!!! !!&!-!4!;!B!F!`!a!!!!!!,!!!kk l l%l)l0l7l>lElXl_lflmltl{llllllllllm mmm"m!!$mm"m@mTm[mvmmmmmn*n>n`nnnno=oooop7pkppppp+qqqqĿ~ytoje`[!!!@!!!!!!4!Z!!!!.!Z!!!! !-!A![!!!!!!!!+!I!P!W!"m@mTm[mvmmmmmn*n>n`nnnno=oooop7pkppppp+qq!qqqqqqqqrrr#r*r1r_rfrmrtr{rrrrrrrsTs[sbsis!$!qqqqqqrrr#r*r1r_rfrmrtr{rrrrrrrsTs[sbsispsws~ssssĿ~ytoje`[!!!!!!! !!!Y!!!!!!!!!!! !:!A!H!O!V!Z!t!u!!!!!ispsws~sssstGttt uKuuuv]vvv,wrwwxOxxx&ykyyy!stGttt uKuuuv]vvv,wrwwxOxxx&ykyyy7z>zz{{"{#{+{\{]{Ŀ~ytoje`[!!@!H!I!g!h!!-!4!t!!!E!!!!f!!!?!!!!P!!! !b!!!$!f!m!y7z>zz{{"{#{+{\{]{{{{{{{{{ |R||| }d}}}~O~~!$!]{{{{{{{{{ |R||| }d}}}~O~~~~/h =t׀.YĿ~ytoje`[!=!i!!!!.!^!!!!<!s!!!!Q!!!!K!!!!b!!!!!!!!!!~~~/h =t׀.Yԁ!@`ق!Yԁ!@`ق#*18_`aiĄȄτքĿ~ytoje`[!!!!!!! ! ! !\!]!!3!:!A!H!O!V!]!d!{!!!!! !+!J!l!!!!!#*18_`aiĄȄτք݄:… Oن!$!ք݄:… Oن)aЇC{"V"M}ي1Ŀ~ytoje`[!d!!!!!I!!!!!I!!!!(!c!!! !B!!!!!b!!!1!y!!!!!ن)aЇC{"V"M}ي1Z͋@!1Z͋@f"ӍԍՍ֍ލߍ012bXfFzڑĿ|wrmheccaaaa*t# !!!!!I!!!!!!!!!!+!R!y!!!!!:&@f"ӍԍՍ֍ލߍ012b '! \ :r. !$(,0A ! #A#p !!XFzڑzZ~~~~ '! ~  H&Pf!%|)-0à dh !2 '! ~ H&^f!%|)-81à '! ~ H&Pf!%|)-0Ãdh # \ :r. !$(,0A '! \ :r. !$(,0A X`(6:LNtv”ΔДz{Ζϖ !-.IJpqrUVWŽŲŤŲōŽjLCJOJQJU0JCJOJQJjKCJOJQJUjCJOJQJUCJH*OJQJ CJOJQJCJH*CJCJH*CJ CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ H*OJQJOJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ5ڑzZ^jڕ.nΖϖ !,-&2j+%&yz{¡(h{Z#9# N-#0^jڕ.nΖϖ ! ! #A#p ! '! ~ H&^f!%|)-81à '! ~ H&Pf!%|)-0à dh !2 '! ~  H&^f!%|)-81Ã!,-&2j+%&yz{¡ '!  :X 6$(-81A#p !x ! ! #AΘϘИ$&'}~ߚ !FGHZ[`aʼʱʣʱʎѱʱʀѱʱrjQCJOJQJUjJPCJOJQJUjyOCJOJQJU 0JOJQJjNCJOJQJUjCJOJQJU B*OJQJCJH*OJQJ CJOJQJ0JCJOJQJjMB*CJOJQJUjB*CJOJQJUB*CJOJQJ,23BCDWXjkݝޝߝjk+,%&wxy{Ƣݣ>*CJOJQJCJH*CJOJQJCJ CJOJQJjvSCJOJQJUjRCJOJQJU0JCJOJQJjQCJOJQJUCJH*OJQJCJH*OJQJ CJOJQJjCJOJQJU3¡(hPƤJdڦTڧ dh !2 '! $ jrP !$).1 %! $ \ dP !$(-1 %! $ \ dP !$(-81dh #  :X 6$(-81A '!  :X 6$(-81AƢȢҢԢޢ"$8:NPdfhxjlvx $&68@BnpĨШҨި>*CJOJQJ H*OJQJOJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ>*CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ>*CJH*OJQJOPƤJdڦTڧX*EѪ:;FG@`&pɳҳӳOQ)OvٵPl ) aq,#2ڧX*EѪ:#p ! !2 %! $ \ dP !$(-1 %! $ \ dP !$(-81 dh !2 '! $ jrP !$).1ѪҪ:;GHcd12opqĬŬ>@Aʳʳ靐z B*OJQJjYVB*CJOJQJUjB*CJOJQJUB*CJOJQJjUCJOJQJU0JCJOJQJjGTCJOJQJUjCJOJQJUCJH*OJQJOJQJCJCJH* CJOJQJ CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ+:;FG@`&pɳҳӳOQ) - :1$4dh !:2 !2$$xx ! ! #AͮήӮԮ 9:_`astް߰abıű`a&'pqɳؽدءؙ؋؃؃؃؃CJH*OJQJj^ZCJOJQJU6CJOJQJjYCJOJQJUjXCJOJQJUCJH*0JCJOJQJjWCJOJQJU CJOJQJ 0JOJQJjCJOJQJUj"WCJOJQJU1ɳʳҳӳOQ´)O]aƵɵ>AķǷ˷ڷݷ*HLCFnp+-Z\] 56>*CJ6B*OJQJ B*OJQJ >*OJQJ>*B*OJQJ5B*CJOJQJ5B*OJQJ CJOJQJM)Ovٵsֶtͷ*qڸ4\ѹFf -P : - :$$d%d&d'dsֶtͷ*qڸ4\ѹFfhiqrĺstvK*Qʽý~ytoj7HkJ=  0x'c \S 9']_bdfghistvKN*-FJKLOQUXZuwxyz}½ýĽŽȽʽͽ"$&'[]^xºκκκκȲ6>*OJQJ jOJQJ 6OJQJ >*OJQJOJQJ 5OJQJ CJOJQJB*CJOJQJ>*B*CJOJQJ B*OJQJ6B*OJQJFfhiqrĺstvK*Qʽ$  !@@dhdh $ !$$ ! !$B 2$&'[\ɾ;=>tuݿSUVI$%QĿ}xsnid_1_ ! .J$^ $$&'[\ɾ;=>tuݿSUV '!  xH^.X #C '!  ,HX (#Cdh *! F xH #@A  !$ $xy}~ɾ̾оѾ  ;=>tvwݿSUVWIJ78ûóûûó>*5H*OJQJ56OJQJ 5OJQJ CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ>*CJOJQJ H*OJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ6>*OJQJ >*OJQJFVI$%Q+@ !!  xH.C $! p2  rB !@ dh !&$$$%&'QRVW~,0ADERTU !:;cd۶ j-OJQJ H*OJQJ>*H*OJQJ >*OJQJ CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ6CJOJQJ6>*CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ CJOJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ?+@RTU3<Ve.\^MpDsþ|wrmhc  @cRT!1KZt}[\^p%@RTU3<Ve|ddh # $ ,4<t"D%CCdh '! $ ,4<t"D%CC '! $ ,4<t"D%CCdh # $ ,4<!D%dh !HB ! !@ !& $!  2 xH.C e.\^Mp$ 8p P!CC !dh &d # $ ,4<t"D%CCdh # $ ,4<t"D%CC '! $ ,4<t"D%CC.DE\^_acijklyz{|2MNdgpq #$ko CJOJQJ H*OJQJ 6OJQJ >*OJQJ>*H*65CJOJQJ 5OJQJB*CJOJQJ jCJOJQJCJH*OJQJ6CJOJQJ CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ>*CJOJQJ j-OJQJ6Ds &;MOP ! !& $!  2 xH.C !!  xH.C $! p2  rB !@ dh !&$DEIJrstyz   '+<?@MOP 56^_.]_`vzüѠ6CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ H*OJQJ>*H*OJQJ >*OJQJ CJOJQJ 6OJQJ>*CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ CJOJQJ6CJOJQJOJQJ6>*CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJ*OJQJB*CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ jCJOJQJCJH*OJQJ6CJOJQJ CJOJQJ804FGHKTWXYdehijknwz",89;<@]a&*im1357B*CJOJQJ CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ>*CJOJQJ H*OJQJ6>*OJQJ>*H*OJQJ >*OJQJ j-OJQJ jOJQJ H*OJQJ 6OJQJOJQJ?;oF\%Rh134Ŀ~yvspmjgda\ <hR(Uk4aw)?z 57$;oF\%Rhdh !hlt"CC !hlt"CCdh !h t"&A134Bdh !! 2 . #R&AA '! . 6$R&&AA !'B ! dh !@$ $B !&B !hlt"CC379;<LNTUVWdefg3@ABF\]swŽŷůũũőőő H*OJQJ6>*CJOJQJ>*H*OJQJ >*OJQJ jOJQJ H*OJQJ jOJQJOJQJ5H*OJQJ556OJQJ 5OJQJ 6OJQJCJH*OJQJ CJOJQJ6CJOJQJ9BJsNPQ+V^_Q>@Agk TĿ}wtqlid_5) t uwL" K5+SU| %<> $BJsNPQ+V^_Q$$" $B ! !`'dh !! HPX $&CC !! HPX $&CCNPQRT48PTVX+,V^_>@Aefgh&>*H*OJQJ6>*OJQJ6H*6CJ >*OJQJ56 56CJ5CJ6CJOJQJB*CJOJQJ CJOJQJCJH*OJQJ>*CJOJQJOJQJ 6OJQJ?>@Agk T|[!dh 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.04dh 22 \ &z"D%n(+.04 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.04 dh 5 \ P Jt"D%n(+h.8144A <|)4Adh   4dh &'qryz789:UX]^y|1247<=QUVY_`}}CJH*OJQJ56 56CJ5CJ>*H*OJQJ6>*OJQJ >*OJQJ6H*6CJ>*CJOJQJOJQJ H*OJQJHT99#x12==2}aK|wrmjgds ]>?A. t uw0#$":<'y|  F&T99f 22 \ &"D%n(+.04 dh 5 \ P Jt"D%n(+h.8144A <|)4Adh   4 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.04 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.049#x12  4dh$$"dh 4 6!2 \ &"D%n(+.04 22 \ &"D%n(+.04!dh 6!2 \ &"D%n(+.04==2}nnhb ! 4 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.04!dh 6!2 \ &z"D%n(+.04 22 \ &z"D%n(+.04 dh 5 \ P Jt"D%n(+h.8144A <|)4Adh  *,2345BCDEX\cdfiabKLSTz8c}$%FGHVWXYH*0Jj[U jUj0JH*U>*H* jCJOJQJCJH*OJQJ6CJOJQJCJH*OJQJB*CJOJQJ CJOJQJBaKS~X(#F>g|sj 4 8p P!CC !S~$%FGHVWX(#F>g|sjp   l # !-./01234567   )k[+-ST()IJmnoTeg)*GHnop!"#$j`Uj`Uj3_UB*H*jj^B*UB* jB*Uj0JH*Ujq]UH*0J jUj@\UDEFG>?gh|}stjkl349:rsxypqyz          l m  H* j j jb j6j0JH*UB*Wjp   l #hd &`h#$&`#$h&`#$  #$̾̾OJQJ0JOJQJmH 0JOJQJj0JOJQJU0J j0JU j0JUH*j0JH*UB*B*H*Khd &`h#$&`#$h&`#$h!"()+,-?@>*H*0J j0JU 0JOJQJj0JOJQJU0JOJQJmH !-./0123456789:;<=>?@ 4hhdh&`#$789:;<=>?@ 8 0 000&PP/ =!"#$%z.0&P0= /!"#$%z; 0 000&P0P= /!"#$%ze 0 000&P0P= /!"#$%z P0    e 0 000&P0P= /!"#$%z P0`X $ t500&P0P= /!"#$%z_ 00&P0P= /!"#$%z P0    500&P0P= /!"#$%ze 0 000&P0P= /!"#$%z P0    200&PP/ =!"#$%z2 00&PP/ =!"#$%z20&P0P= /!"#$%zU 00&P0P= /!"#$%z P0```20&P0P= /!"#$%z/0&PP/ =!"#$%z/0&PP/ =!"#$%z5 00&P0P= /!"#$%zDyK  hand@unc.eduyK (mailto:hand@unc.eduDyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.ipomaven.comyK 2http://www.ipomaven.com/DyK www.ipocentral.comyK 6http://www.ipocentral.com/DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/DyK www.e-harmon.com,yK 4http://www.e-harmon.com,/DyK  www.sec.govyK (http://www.sec.gov/xDd B   S A ? 2-oNC p`!-oNC 8>8xR1K@~Z4-ERҽbԂB (N?pP  ]RSq˽;Ia,aLb1 @[ "F_S4a AGB}#)&ܓR{Tc&"Ġg*"ph5WZ ڀGڀ?D;P̋`՚ӱwϮ ܝzOoj?Лi)B;e&ηYMq!?(IIgi~jK~'%6@QcU}wu @RU Q!D7| Fe5A6  bUu\s\2'&/rDd B  S A? 2C"~[?؝).up`!"~[?؝).`zL x}+DQ=73of MB앍&cPG5=YLLVV,d% Z cs>w$u;{9Ѐl6b-$DY ViRs}WaD)yp)Ɨ̪1Tk\$`djun_dI;F7q n5=JezNZFߦڨ۴3I;.;do*  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root EntryP F@x`px@1Data 8bWordDocumentOkObjectPool@x`px_1008767544JF@x@xOle CompObjfObjInfo  !"%()*-01478;>?BEFGHKNOPQTWZ]`cdgjklnopqrstvwxyz{|}~ FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q} RPE i =2M  i "M i M i Equation Native _1008768550 F=πx=πxOle CompObj f FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q SRPE i =2M  i /M i "11"M i /2M  i {}ObjInfo Equation Native  _10087679631 FxxOle CompObjfObjInfoEquation Native _1008768072F-逧xx FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q i if 2M  i e"M i if 2M  i <M i FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS EqOle CompObjfObjInfoEquation Native :uation Equation.39q 2M  i FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q BV t =B_1009085412FxxOle CompObjfObjInfoEquation Native _1009085411F` x` xOle #CompObj $fV t"1 1+NI t BV t"1 "D t BV t"1 () FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q< r t =loObjInfo!&Equation Native '_1008480468$F@x@xOle +g e 1+NI t BV t"1 "D t BV t"1 () FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q log e BCompObj#%,fObjInfo&.Equation Native /_1008481500",)F`)#x`)#x t =log e B 0 +r =1t " FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q r t =log e 1+NI t BOle 2CompObj(*3fObjInfo+5Equation Native 6V t"1 () FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q (r t "r)=(r t"1 "r)+i t + t_1008481617.F@3x@3xOle 9CompObj-/:fObjInfo0<Equation Native =_1008483355';3F=x=xOle @CompObj24Af FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q log e BV T =log e BV 0 +(r 0 "r)" T+1 1"+i tObjInfo5CEquation Native D4_10084835278F DxMxOle It=1T " +rT+* FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q E 0 BV T []=cB 0 1+NI 0 BV "1 (CompObj79JfObjInfo:LEquation Native M_10084838726E=FUxUx) " T+1 1" e  FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39qBX =i tt=1T "Ole RCompObj<>SfObjInfo?UEquation Native V^_1008484020BF^x^xOle XCompObjACYfObjInfoD[ FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39q/il N(0, 2 ) FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS EqEquation Native \K_1008484264@GFtoxtoxOle ^CompObjFH_fuation Equation.39qp V 0 =E 0 BV T []R T FMicrosoft Equation 3.0 DS Equation Equation.39qObjInfoIaEquation Native b_1008484677LF=x=xOle eCompObjKMffObjInfoNhEquation Native i1TableZNn V 0 =BV 0 1+NI 0 BV "1 ()  e  Oh+'0 0< X d p |Vwhxlșͪz:z{=C/X~@%* ?|Ѯ'%W~@%?$?)>#{7yV,#z/Wңbzl0Z[&Ṡ}u&//|I?ߺ9͚$Bz̉G>Np9Ju?}Z.Lf>sd#r:NQqn,;;$F ".ĭ#9e5_bef/ۄ+}JT7VDdtB  S A? 2!3UzPJNp`!!3UzPJ  `\bxR=O0}_@CPJ03H?VЊPVaa`aèYv$& Ywbt@X|rbDĘ%I:[6dglE_XZ~Hd<"% \QϔI ed'L\o; ;Ǹ={ޢ/tQ|LNgF&~W9mܝIFl%+<5Lټ1'kawx_bƌլ۲:)q N ݫÈV[h*sLĿ=vTmDdT|B  S A? 2cQ@lBIuzN?p`!7Q@lBIuzN `XJ0xcdd`` @c112BYL%bL0Yn&&! KA?HD깡jx|K2B* Rͤ XB2sSRsֵ- PT obIFHeA*  t!f0%0rX@^X?LAtO9 +ss4,m[//027fVi^ dB@?͌J] s~T~ `u|+N_Wem+!U˿^j\ eay!l]dn6 ,@{C2sSRs/r8Ce.2n;J|E(|^T PT obIFHeA*  t!f0%0rX@n/LlAtO9 +ssL/m[//027f*_Ʉd@!o0Y s~T~ ` @|m8&8fl+!U˿/"G Lۇe?>,\>{Xd++&1 p^p{\@L(|?\-P7/p<Z;0[񂒾SdKL^U4 GpzrBT +ˋ gF΅LLJ% ii_A>06z0ۼDd8 B  S A? 2   57Vi\o`!  57Vi@x}SK@~wImsatq(.ZQqb#6u\tP"V7rcM8}{  @G]4,#AI>>_k70ÿ|oS'Ŕ|wYmY ym(]p?A}+QNNz2 ^,p+qHcx,Q?+`?~tIFQ~κ^!3%3&Afz] e܅ϊN3pg˶h§[ Y(G?Aܲm,գX?˸AuCDdB  S A? 2f9/N,V 6o`!f9/N,V 6Ɗ` .`\x}K@߽M uqJ:*.nE,b[m [(tUAob'+VJk%/wA >>*dQ mj ;Ϣ y0tx~lsqu( bML_>Q:!d!LcOjl2nyD ?UVVϽU4'&ִڴ$WSϙw랿Sg/^Oz'>g W}/v^o}( %uUnqAqd͊\,doɸŽq˭ q \P.UbSﻬyzOzPX[V}~u@|1g3fDf;E٫"1t-8Je/}FΗDdc hB  S A? 2 @cx1.=Yn p`! @cx1.=Yn@|xK@]Z&ՆN" APqtBcb"89&9h: 4޻$gT1}rB < OqX"u]n͒a[HEzb51p1 7:co },弳ix_4f @Xf-l镪U܀7~~6 "/üc$m`h x{PrV*~Zjh?~~Z3)*N)yJ𞆼%8|7<)X㣊 2σ߫ WuT]`sm2M97st+ļeQ!3? :l^:/;)E']R9#x7 C>{&6{7&c1/o7B(9i1V*̏g`@y7DdB  S A?  2$DzBV,Jw~}<#p`!u$DzBV,Jw~,!R4CxMhA߼M٤6HUSxAۃ؃RUXJJœɓ(A/=zJqW|GCQn[?E/ć3ߏSam/|-䋿M3]'qeDWAY 6ō# v!)腸⁹j+Cs;֣5Y"2%gDd B  S A?  2{Vj H6s&p`!{Vj H6( sxkA&MI=HՈ"Pm؋V]!)"CEOЛ<_ (AD`)**QT͏nLZ7 >}1M LT[etlS>q2v$a;t0 lΏ+]c'g.iPoϚPsP++|-]RG~1>{*o-n%!oG5p嬨WQY~:? CQ 4&o$K"i&"YOI(Jjmk2yC/Szһ=O^ד@ #W m;OF[[NU:N}cJGt12u:G*hfs> {h0un޿c@k?9bN&\dC{0y)|s=ҿ0 Z{2o~_蚧fx/1y9⊹4$G}|0/frzew=Ůz7L1?g,USOůO9LJjJKK֥|ر@xAx݆AAśK(jsn/ /zqvwO 1 dDdLB  S A?  2G݌f-1)p`!G݌f-1, xtpxcdd`` @c112BYL%bL0YnL؄,56~) m @ k7/`c` T UXRYvoa +ss<ė-_ߗ \ ,@@@ڈ˒i)mO+!)ec~eLkY@FBmǝh@v'\F3Eq/ ܐbr<$. ^`Tܯ `(߁I ?O0XPcZ| sS+ ΅%v0o8221)W2+󧥳3t106:'-DdhB   S A ?  2k!!ŎTFs>,p`!kk!!ŎTF4@|9xcdd``bd``baV d,FYzP1C&,7\V! KA?H @e߁jx|K2B* R XB2sSRsֵ-\ P.P56ZxU_v 38? ׀@|J{\a vQ%?AQ2727)?Kf"3?!2 2 \; `p\121)W23 3t106M[bDdlB   S A ?  2n`/>!k.p`!n`/>!0@ xcdd``$d@9`,&FF(`T̐ &  A?d szjx|K2B* Rjck&,`Bܤ G{iu@|!}9T T 4+Q5y[yR1Hs1A|0Aa fr@ܠB2sSRsԃp P7IKn^0p`! >IKn^H8x;/Q=3NPFjkj+X$$FᑨdkFɖJ£!1YI͜?;A@kG~(2, 5wi1x:\V8@A1'٭aS~{GAwn&Wd5rk/F`ғGT+挛__pL9j!0&gd]0[GBi2q%Pbǃ,  *~tB(,R:L:V  $fn XrX"Cz\̖ .Pj5kWWzH`ďQ* ,#=`^U`9qՇ%ȪN Շm*+uUOֶʒ% :S9C-X] Sc>>.SJ^}kbQYhl;\ǚUXX_+qwrX%=.jVS[7k*}غ ,_kܺWDu'uã\=օ`Q XqlQHXkl`J`OZۨTYJ^C HXK`FݾZׁ K#+_>  HXa"0rX`]w@]V bJ`݃zq X }ޑ Pj ".;W2'O%@b_ $WJ)Z`jX kjjX ?VAݾZ Fj |QuZ`#H.%@4,Z`qJ`/ ,H,X K`/ ,H,X K`/ ,H,X K`ďYHXFdnGJ`/VKon +cxjXɖ_ $ni}q{8Q`/| W %F"uV uTǸX(oJ`H9Q>KX ,ֵm\ ,_'`X(1ǃp%Pb5b{1ǕBMDK`dAjO$J`݂5I-=|p%PQZyHhs+ȁsW+K`Ad0wX e8Ww;;u/v&zC>` k@7xO3s }['>Λp۰>-n] V[=-/Z;Bic_vˆm#isS;ЋI #n#7f3u .S s-, &2,Xw T bzsv~IE`]ֹ Obui5XeXw5{ 86JϢ`e*]02Ɗ̷`d:kI/t9]Z`%cs85%`mG|N-5ahӓ›W@ǺS H}y7B::LNq: \ % 0#36vcթV8dhꁫ`uWXڍCfX?UmMDV-02鴽K|,,Mvxe}0!aU ,Dj~{fpk&/_ˠMtԼV-0tmX%mTǚ,3V%\ *OEM}tP>C|Rw*۾=iX>R_gmUtBq^6U*&+vTumdqa e[fZQBMXAnBSpiۓ&Ƚ`]uI_"k wB-,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$iI,ƚ$g"&2!Xgy,ڷݲLò~6+"Խ5-kc됢 jR z) snwrOb*7Xg{ d`yizjӝ(W+.K-V?`bQs`|Ҳ\`ʀqԂHLcMۿ2=*gV.N֠RʴW;C*_MQsTn*(u; P 0 UⒹ*cjEu?^"0rĊ2FEӵ9 q-^'j_fq?G9#W]:鲝 Z}?Age-VWRƮH]tmH䌰V*\}EK]$XEϕ;e*^܃5ϿթbץZ'Jͷn[%M+ݩ0rmؕb[<F>ԧ0ϧVT*I%coKt7kaf;bF`;0_;kXF!6Ա^睌49gi~]ciJrYFIABO~֖KU^G>I ,O9݄|كiIENDB`DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/=DyK 2http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.htmlyK dhttp://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.htmlDyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.ipomaven.comyK 2http://www.ipomaven.com/DyK www.ipocentral.comyK 6http://www.ipocentral.com/DyK www.ipocentral.comyK 6http://www.ipocentral.com/DyK  www.sec.govyK (http://www.sec.gov/DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/DyK www.stocksheet.comyK 6http://www.stocksheet.com/DyK www.stocksheet.comyK 6http://www.stocksheet.com/DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/=DyK 2http://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.htmlyK dhttp://www.marketguide.com/mgi/HELP/glossary.htmlDyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.ipomaven.comyK 2http://www.ipomaven.com/DyK www.ipocentral.comyK 6http://www.ipocentral.com/DyK www.stocksheet.comyK 6http://www.stocksheet.com/DyK www.stocksheet.comyK 6http://www.stocksheet.com/!DyK +http://www.stocksheet.com/definitions.htmlyK Vhttp://www.stocksheet.com/definitions.htmlDyK www.wssrn.com.yK .http://www.wssrn.com./1DyK /http://sites.stockpoint.com/internet/isdex.aspyK ^http://sites.stockpoint.com/internet/isdex.aspDyK !http://www.kcbt.com/isdexfaq.htmyK Bhttp://www.kcbt.com/isdexfaq.htmDyK www.internet.comyK 2http://www.internet.com/DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/DyK www.marketguide.comyK 8http://www.marketguide.com/[DyK 6www.marketguide.com/mgi/RESEARCH/jan2000/NETLROT.XLS.yK zhttp://www.marketguide.com/mgi/RESEARCH/jan2000/NETLROT.XLS.SummaryInformation(QmDocumentSummaryInformation8MacrosW`x`xVBAU`x`x-Economic determinants of accounting choices:8.0conTerrance R. SkantzterrNormalerandolph p. beattyt2ndMicrosoft Word 8.0t@F#@D(tm@\x@\xF0* pHdProjectQ(@= l Dv7 J< rstdole>stdoleP f%\*\G{00020430-C 0046}#2.0#0#C:\WINNT\System32\STDOLE2.TdiruThisDocumentTV_VBA_PROJECT PROJECTSXkLB# Automation ^mMSFo@rms> MSFErm@s/z pF49061C59-ACA1-11D0-9AC6F104E344DCF3.TWD#MicrosPoft = ` Ob Libr8ary9P0gP1996CCDA-6F5DP3-9BCCPC04FB67DD5PTEMP\Word8.0\'EX'.E .``M CwN@TalCwNSaw( + *\C :76OfficDO@ficB G{2DF8D04C-5BFA-101B -BDE5`http://www.wssrn.com./&5h`Figure 1 991229.gif̖]oO}`L&WordkVBAWin16~Win32MacNet_paper1_990926stdole`MSFormsC ThisDocument< _EvaluateNormalOfficeuProject- HTMLHidden1V HTMLHidden2V HTMLHidden3VDocumentj` ID="{1996CCE1-6F5D-11D3-9BCC-00C04FB67DD5}" Document=ThisDocument/&H00000000 Name="Project" HelpContextID="0" CMG="42404B0B890F890F890F890F" DPB="84868DCD8D0E8E0E8E0E" GC="C6C4CF8F5393949494946B" [Host Extender Info] &H00000001={3832D640-CF90-11CF-8E43-00A0C911005A};VBE;&H00000000 &H00000002={000209F2-0000-0000-C000-000000000046};Word8.0;&H00000000 U\gThisDocumentThisDocument  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qPROJECTlkYPROJECTwm)CompObjRj      !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345) [D@D Normal1$ CJOJQJ_HkHmH sH tH @@@ Heading 1 $$a$5OJQJkHJJ Heading 2$$x@&a$6CJKHOJQJ<@< Heading 3 $x@& 5OJQJBB Heading 4$$@&a$5CJ OJQJ@@@ Heading 5$$@&a$5B*OJQJ@@@ Heading 6$@& @ 6OJQJ\\ Heading 7+$@& hHzX #CC >*OJQJX@X Heading 8#$$$d %d &d 'd @&5CJ$OJQJF @F Heading 9 $@&5B*CJ OJQJhnH <A@< Default Paragraph Font4&@4 Footnote ReferenceDPD Body Text 2d` OJQJkH, @, Footer  !&)@!& Page Number:@2: Footnote Text CJOJQJ,B, Header  !&(@Q& Line NumberJC@bJ Body Text Indentd`OJQJ@Tr@ Block Text&L]&^LOJQJ\R@\ Body Text Indent 2 0^`0 6OJQJ(U@( Hyperlink>*B*TST Body Text Indent 3 1$^6CJOJQJ2B@2 Body Text CJOJQJTT TOC 1, $ 0*$1$]^`0 CJOJQJ8Y8 Document Map-D OJQJ0Q0 Body Text 3$a$0+0 Endnote TextCJ6*@6 Endnote ReferenceH*8Z@8 Plain Text!1$ CJOJQJ4>@"4 Title "$1$a$ 5OJQJ:J@2:Subtitle#$1$5CJOJQJ8V@A8FollowedHyperlink>*B* XXz-Bottom of Form %$$d<CJOJQJhmH nH RR z-Top of Form &$&d<CJOJQJhmH nH 6'@q6Comment ReferenceCJ<< Comment Text(1$ CJOJQJ%),o.Z146K<I_U6ZZwt•Oͦk-(`BD  &_Z [ j[C4'0]D ;!"#l#*%-%               |ST $o$?-I[\։Ϯ  : j   u   D    G   4 '88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888CRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR]lllllllllllw-18_Y|&AnL%DH KmN`XƢɳ]xz&@ !(4@LXc)*,-1KOPRUWX[_aegklpsuz}~ \5dTbxt,$4'z "57FARx g_@  o   ^   (Z+P/1F5ze<'  ^!""H##$+%%J&&' ((x)2**+@,,-'../00*112633455{6 77Q899S::;?<<=@>>?I@@yABB C%C?CYCsCCCCJN]alcMfuhk"mqisy~ن@!¡ڧ:)f$V@e.BT9j@ "#$&')*,-./1236789;<=>ABCDFGHIKMNPQRSUVWY[\]^`abdfghjkmnprtvxy{}    "$&(+.02468:<=?ACEGIJMNQTVY\^`cdfijnortwxy{j@XTD?-']    c   FgPAxMMN !!"H# $$%0&&'(=) **+i,--.n/00l1;2234=566z7.889n:;;<z=<>??@HAAB C*CHCfCCCC[bdgjmqs]{Yք1ڑsT7@%+05:?EJOTZ_eiloqsuwz|~  !#%'/3579;>@BDFHLSZ]bhmqv|)))2*W*h***+j+++R,w,,---../000c33377 8878J8;;<VVW')/CEFZ\BBBC2C4CYCmCoCDDDDDD[FoFqF}FFFF G GG$G&GGGGJH^H`HyOOOUUV׏}5FFYƓЕ DWɟ֠*O`"39`sƣ٣EXǥ* XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:::::::::::::::XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX #'.18?CJMRY]dglsw~!!t!!t!!!!!!O~#n"l-%XXXXXXX-.`2$=g0.p/2$؞@=y!u>-tj2$]H~˼Ń} 2$"EH$޸{% 2$X8'LEX;)2$VhHr>y]i$2$c>lΫăQ4@-0(   B S  ?  _Hlt470939426 _Hlt470939434 _Hlt471995585F G 1<ry' !!!!e"m"r"u"h#r#''''J+]+1 2a2j24#4=AHA>FBFGFJFXXXXY YYYM_N_T_````_cicxcc iiiimm[p\p_pdpnpqqqqsssuuuz{dntvY[х؅3CJT~ QYrzms~W]hKWݷIU (ikv_cn5=ov (5@FY^+29Bnv$^cEKV[5>QYdh)2=BCLMP ^gBM}QU 2;GOX]  FPpx irCLXa"(;Ejs)/[a$.hq~K\hm3:]f.3DK$$$$$$/%6%@%G%H%K%Z%a%k%r%}%%%&#&*&&&W'a'q'w'''( (,(3(J(Q((((()))))))******U+Y+r+y+++++++-,3,R,X,o,s,,,,,-----...... /a/j////////0;0F0W0^000001#1B1K11111 22L2S22222Z3`3333444Q4[444444444455 55'5G5M5_5c5556"6X6a66666c7q777777708:8I8P88888899999: :":*:A:I:}::::::::I;L;Y;a;r;{;;;7<;<<<c=i=z=======>7>@>X>`>>>>>??Y@[@x@z@AA/A;AAAAABBCCCCDDEE9F;FHH9I=IJIMIhItIJJJJ*K,K9KWgWmWpWvWWWWWWWWW9X?XyXXXXYYY YYYOZQZyZZZZZZw\\] ]=_>_``b)beeeeJfKfffPiQiRiSiminipiqitiuiiiiiiiiijj#j$j%j&jNjOjTjUjWjXjjjjjjjjjjjkkOkPkYkZkikjkqkrkkkkkkkkk5l6lblcliljloooo@pApppqqqqCqDqGqHqIqJq~qqqqqqqqqqJrKrOrPrrrrrss#s$sRsSsVsWsYsZs_s`sbscsssssss4t5tJtKtMtNt{t|tttuu u u$u%uuuuu z zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz{{{ {"{#{{{{{||||}}} }}} ~ ~˂ׂ̂؂ !XZxyŃƃ΃σ,-cdefghopڄۄ܄݄ !TU}~ce)/~ !'(239@EFNOV&)ilێ6IJ[)5ؙޙ#&ךޚߚқ؛ehPcdu kpzU]ruxAI^kpsenx}[dGJLO&."#);=AEFKMPRXjly|  &8:GJ@H\]+6} /BQY<BDJOTPVjnsxqz"1<   &       %LPQfh~<ci#69 #8$ 1 R ]"##%#2$4&499999`:c:x:=F?G?b?m??AAAABB5CmCpCCHLMMQfRiR5S>S{SWXXXX6XafJT>C INUZ*.[dv{;@vy1:#?;=*ktA4;+1IJZa15\a5 /7t~*y   &      John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand1C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\junk.doc John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand@C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\Net_paper1_20000110.doc John Hand1C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\junk.doc John Hand1C:\Data\INTERNET\Net paper 1, 9911\PAPER\junk.docrandolph p. beatty$C:\63252000\readings 2000\25hand.doc|}^~f[6"D&F<>Î/NҘpBW  X4j«1:5{;FqA \* $c̬Uten؝fo 3gr ..88.. OJQJo( OJQJo( 88OJQJo( OJQJo(hh. hhOJQJo(0^`0o(.0^`0o(.0^`0o(..0^`0o(... 88^8`o( .... 88^8`o( ..... `^``o( ...... `^``o(....... ^`o(........hh^h`o(. 0OJQJo(0^`0o(0^`0o(.0^`0o(..0^`0o(... 88^8`o( .... 88^8`o( ..... `^``o( ...... `^``o(....... ^`o(........ 0OJQJo(0^`0o(0^`0o(.0^`0o(..0^`0o(... 88^8`o( .... 88^8`o( ..... `^``o( ...... `^``o(....... ^`o(........0^`0o(.f!f!o(  hhOJQJo( hhOJQJo(/ $cA \1:BW tenfo3gr{;X4~}| @HP LaserJet 4LPT1:HPPCL5MSHP LaserJet 4HP LaserJet 4@g XX@MSUDHP LaserJet 4<d HP LaserJet 4@g XX@MSUDHP LaserJet 4<d BU|fffffffff @,@T@gTimes New RomanTimes New Roman5Symbol?& ArialArialK,Bookman Old Style?5 Courier New5& :Tahoma;Wingdings" hBfBfbBfFS 1T$ 0dH,Economic determinants of accounting choices:Terrance R. Skantzrandolph p. beatty