perusahaan yang tepat perusahaan ya

perusahaan yang tepat perusahaan yang dianggap investor yang lebih baik. Namun, kita harus berhati-hati inferensi berdasarkan uji univariat. Nilai Sebuah perusahaan dipengaruhi oleh banyak faktor seperti ukuran, leverage, aset tidak berwujud, manajemen, dll Kita perlu untuk mengontrol faktor-faktor yang juga mempengaruhi nilai untuk menarik kesimpulan apakah penerima penghargaan memang lebih berharga dari perusahaan lain di pasar. Dengan demikian kita beralih ke analisis multivariat. Uji multivariat Pada bagian ini kita berusaha untuk isolale lanjut perbedaan nilai antara penghargaan dan perusahaan yang cocok.

Untuk melakukan regresi multivariat untuk mengontrol karakteristik othcr.
Kami menggunakan serangkaian variabel kontrol yang berasal dari nilai-relevan penelitian sebelumnya teguh pada nilai perusahaan. Morck dan Yeung (1991) memberikan pengeluaran teoritis sebagai proxy untuk pembenaran yang kuat untuk mengendalikan R & D dan iklan asscts spccific yang mungkin lcad untuk cconomic sewa. Mereka juga mengendalikan pengaruh sebagai proxy untuk manfaat pembiayaan. Berger dan Ofek (1995) menunjukkan pentingnya mengontrol ukuran profitabilitas, peluang pertumbuhan (belanja modal),


intuisi dan hasil penelitian sebelumnya (mis Morck dan Yeung, 1991;. Berger dan Ofek, 1995). Untuk semua model, profitabilitas relatif tinggi (EBIT / Sales), leverage (/ Penjualan Capex) peluang (R & D / Penjualan, dan investasi (Penjualan Hutang), R & intensitas D semua secara signifikan terkait dengan nilai yang lebih besar. Ukuran perusahaan berhubungan negatif dengan nilai, menunjukkan perusahaan-perusahaan besar dihargai perusahaan-perusahaan kecil. Advertising (Advert / Penjualan) adalah tiba-tiba negatif, bagaimanapun, tidak begitu signifikan. bukti penting terutama dalam penelitian ini adalah bahwa, setelah mengendalikan semua influenccs lainnya terhadap nilai perusahaan, dalam model 1, FDummy tetap 0,11424 dan sangat signifikan pada tingkat 0,01. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa pemenang penghargaan dihargai 114 perccnt lebih tinggi dari perusahaan dalam sampel yang cocok. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa pemenang penghargaan busur valucd lebih tinggi dari perusahaan yang dinyatakan sebanding (yaitu struktur industri. sama, perusahaan karakteristik dan waktu) Sumber nilai Modcl 1 menunjukkan pemenang penghargaan sekitar 11,4 persen lebih tinggi nilainya dibanding h sebagai str11ct11rn industri dan differen rps perusahaan n di rerinients sering


Model 1 menunjukkan penghargaan thr winncrs busur sekitar 114 persen lebih tinggi nilainya dibanding non-penerima, setelah semua perbedaan seperti struktur industri dan karakteristik perusahaan dikendalikan untuk. Kita dapat menyimpulkan fron facls ini yang pemenang penghargaan yang perusahaan lebih berharga, Namun, masih belum diketahui apakah pemenang THC bangsal menambahkan valuc untuk perusahaan atau penerima adalah untuk memulai dengan perusahaan-perusahaan lebih sukses. Penghargaan ini bisa menambah nilai penerimanya karena sinyal kepemimpinan yang efektif dan kualitas manajemen yang unggul, stics karakter yang no1 possibiliry ini, kami menjalankan univariat dan sebelumnya dikenal pasar. analisis T pada sampel uji untuk periode sebelum dan sesudah penghargaan, dan multivariatc antara tahun penghargaan dan semua tahun-tahun berikutnya setelah penghargaan. Hasilnya dilaporkan dalam panel Kedua Tabel II dan model 2.4 pada Tabel IV Panel Boi Tabel Il menyajikan empat langkah nilai perusahaan untuk pemenang penghargaan dalam periode heforc, pada, dan aftrr mobil penghargaan. Kami pertama kali membagi pengamatan firma-tahun untuk pemenang penghargaan dalam periode pasca-penghargaan dan periode pra-penghargaan, tergantung pada apakah tahun data tertentu adalah sebelum atau setelah tahun ketika uue Linn: reveived penghargaan. Kami menggunakan dua sampel tes t untuk perbedaan berarti, dan uji signed-rank untuk median, betwenn periode yang berbeda. Jika penghargaan menciptakan nilai baik karena perbaikan dalam kualitas, kita harus mampu mengamati nilai publisitas atau perbedaan yang signifikan antara dua periode yang berbeda. Kami juga hould berharap periode aller-penghargaan Lo memiliki nilai lirrn lebih tinggi. Namun, data tidak mendukung hipotesis ini Sementara MTB menunjukkan signifikan, dan PE perbedaan sedikit signifikan, perbedaan n EV ukuran yang tidak signifikan. Setelah disesuaikan untuk efek industri, easure VM menunjukkan bahwa nilai perusahaan tidak berbeda secara signifikan setelah menerima Lhe penghargaan Kami lebih menguji perbedaan nilai hetween Avard-tahun, di mana perusahaan mereka penghargaan, dan sebelum periode penghargaan. Hasilnya juga termasuk dengan hampir tidak ada perbedaan yang signifikan di semua langkah-langkah nilai kecuali untuk MTB. Hal ini menunjukkan pemenang LHE penghargaan tidak menjadi lebih berharga dalam periode ketika mereka penghargaan. Howcwo m, aa discirssed prcviously, banyak faktor yang mempengaruhi nilai perusahaan. Kita perlu untuk mengendalikan

Results (English) 1:

the right company of the company which is considered a better investor. However, we should be careful of inference based on the univariate test. The value of a company is influenced by many factors such as size, leverage, intangible assets, management, etc. We need to control the factors that also influence the value to draw conclusions whether the recipient of the award is indeed more valuable than other companies in the market. Thus we turn to multivariate analysis. Multivariate tests in this section we attempt to further isolale the difference in value between the awards and the company match. To perform a multivariate regression to control othcr characteristics. We use a series of controls that are derived from the variable value-relevant previous research firm on corporate values. Morck and Yeung (1991) provide a theoretical expenditure as a proxy for a strong justification to control the R & D and advertising a spccific asscts maybe lcad to cconomic lease. They also control the influence as a proxy for the benefits of financing. Berger and Ofek (1995) demonstrate the importance of controlling the size of profitability, growth opportunities (capital expenditure),intuition and previous research results (e.g., Morck and Yeung, 1991;. Berger and Ofek, 1995). For all models, relatively high profitability (EBIT/Sales), leverage (Capex/sales) opportunities (R & D/sales, and investment (debt sale), R & D intensity were all significantly associated with greater value. The size of the company is associated with negative value, showing large companies small companies are rewarded. Advertising (Advert/sales) was unexpectedly negative, however, was not so significant. especially important evidence in this study is that, after controlling all influenccs to the value of the company, in model 1, the fixed 0.11424 and FDummy very significant at a level of 0.01. This indicates that the award-winning appreciated 114 perccnt higher than companies in the sample. This indicates that the arc's award-winning valucd higher than the stated company comparable (i.e. the structure of the industry. the company's characteristics, and the same time) the resource values for the award-winning Modcl 1 shows about 11.4 percent higher in value than the str11ct11rn h as industry and Enterprise n differen rps in rerinients oftenModel 1 shows the ARC Awards winncrs thr about 114 percent higher in value than non-recipients, after all a difference such as the structure of the industry and corporate characteristics are controlled for. We can conclude this facls fron the award-winning company more valuable, however, is still not known whether the winner of THC Ward added a valuc to company or the recipient is to start with companies more successful. This award could add value to the recipient because it signals an effective leadership and quality management of a superior, stics characters no1 possibiliry this, we run a univariate and previously known to the market. the analysis of the test sample for T in the period before and after the awards, and multivariatc between the years awards and all subsequent years after award. The results are reported in the second panel of table II model and 2.4 on table IV Panel Boi Table Il presents a four-step rating companies to award winners in the period heforc, on, and car aftrr award. We first divide the firm-year observations to award winners in the post-war period and the period of pre-award, depending on whether a particular data year is before or after the year when the uue Linn: reveived award. We use a two-sample t test for mean difference, and signed-rank test for medians, betwenn different periods. If the awards create value either because of improvements in the quality, we should be able to observe the value of the publicity or significant differences between two different periods. We also hope the period hould aller-award Lo has the value lirrn. However, the data do not support this hypothesis While MTB showed significant, significant differences and slight, the difference n EV insignificant size. After adjusting for the effects of industry, easure VM shows that the value of the company did not differ significantly after receiving our award Lhe more test the difference value hetween Avard-years, where their company awards, and before the period of the award. The result is also included with almost no significant difference at all steps of the value except for MTB. This indicates the winner of the award not LHE becomes more valuable in the period when they award. Howcwo m, aa discirssed prcviously, many of the factors that affect the value of the company. We need to control

Results (English) 2:

the right company the company is considered a better investor. However, we must be careful inference based on univariate. A company's value is influenced by many factors such as size, leverage, intangible assets, management, etc. We need to control the factors that also affect the value to draw conclusions whether the recipient of the award is more valuable than any other company in the market. Thus we turn to multivariate analysis. Multivariate Test In this section we seek to further isolale difference between the value of the award and a suitable company. To perform a multivariate regression to control othcr characteristics. We use a set of control variables are derived from value-relevant previous research firm on corporate value. Morck and Yeung (1991) provides a theoretical expenditure as a proxy for a strong justification for controlling R & D and advertising asscts spccific that may lcad to cconomic lease. They also control the influence as a proxy for the benefits of financing. Berger and Ofek (1995) shows the importance of controlling the size of profitability, growth opportunities (capital expenditure), intuition and the results of previous studies (eg Morck and Yeung, 1991 ;. Berger and Ofek, 1995). For all models, profitability is relatively high (EBIT / Sales), leverage (/ Sales Capex) opportunity (R & D / Sales, and Investment (Sale of Debt), R & intensity D all significantly associated with a greater value. Size Companies is negatively related to the value, showing large companies valued small companies. Advertising (Advert / Sales) are suddenly negative, however, is not so significant, the evidence is particularly important in this study is that, after controlling for all influenccs more towards value companies, in model 1, FDummy fixed 0.11424 and very significant at the 0.01 level. this shows that the award-winning 114 perccnt valued higher than the companies in the sample matched. this indicates that the award-winning arc valucd higher than the company otherwise comparable (ie the structure of the industry. Similarly, enterprise characteristics and time) Source Modcl 1 shows the value of the award-winning approximately 11.4 percent higher in value than h as str11ct11rn industry and differen n rps company in rerinients frequently Model 1 shows a thr award winncrs bow approximately 114 percent higher in value than non-recipients, after all the difference as the industrial structure and firm characteristics are controlled for. We can conclude this facls fron the award-winning company is more valuable, however, is still not known whether the winner THC valuc wards added to the company or the receiver is to start with those companies more successful. This award could add value to the recipient as a signal of effective leadership and management of superior quality, which no1 possibiliry character stics, we run univariate and previously unknown market. T analysis of the test sample for the period before and after the award, and multivariatc between the awards and all subsequent years after the award. The results are reported in Table II and the second panel models in Table IV Panel 2.4 Boi Table Il presents four steps to the award-winning company's value in the period heforc, on, and the car aftrr awards. We first divide the firm-year observations for the award winners in the post-award and the pre-award, depending on whether the particular data is before or after the year when uue Linn: reveived awards. We used two-sample t test for differences in means, and signed-rank test for the median, betwenn different periods. If the award creates a good value due to improvements in the quality, we should be able to observe the value of publicity or significant differences between the two different periods. We also hope that the period hould aller-award-Lo has lirrn higher value. However, the data do not support this hypothesis While MTB showed significant and marginally significant difference PE, EV n size difference is not significant. After adjusting for the effects of industry, easure VM indicates that the value of the company were not significantly different after receiving the award LHE We further test the difference hetween Avard-year value, where their company awards, and before the period of the award. The results are also included with almost no significant difference in all measures except value for MTB. This shows LHE award winner does not become more valuable in periods when they award. Howcwo m, aa discirssed prcviously, many factors that affect the value of the company. We need to control