Close

Complete Captcha

• 4 months - 78 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 146 Goods vs 47 No Goods

1. Economist
   e74c
   

   Most of us are Team Black because we don't believe any of VF/AH papers. We just don't say it publicly because we don't want people to investigate our papers.

   You are on Team Black? So which coauthor of Bernie are you?

   I am on Team Black.
   Reg monkeys like Huang's and Fans and Zhangs to h*ll.

   Fang, Vivian W. and Huang, Allen and Karpoff, Jonathan M., Reply to 'The Reg SHO Reanalysis Project: Reconsidering Fang, Huang and Karpoff (2016) on Reg SHO and Earnings Management' by Black et al. (2019) (December 19, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3507033

   Glad to see this discussion. Look forward to reading this and any replies from BB and co
   

   3 months ago # QUOTE 5 Good 0 No Good !

2. Economist
   5e59
   

   ^ I don’t know who AH is but why are you afraid of have your own papers investigated?

   3 months ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Good !

3. Economist
   b516
   

   Wait, that wasn’t actually Bernie posting was it? Why would you sign you give credibility to a racist/ sexist message board by signing your name to a post? There are some people who actually care about the things you say. Use your head, man.

   3 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 5 No Good !

4. Economist
   e74c
   

   I think it was, but I am not sure

   Wait, that wasn’t actually Bernie posting was it? Why would you sign you give credibility to a racist/ sexist message board by signing your name to a post? There are some people who actually care about the things you say. Use your head, man.

   3 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

5. Economist
   3afe
   

   Wait, that wasn’t actually Bernie posting was it? Why would you sign you give credibility to a racist/ sexist message board by signing your name to a post? There are some people who actually care about the things you say. Use your head, man.

   For Chaired Prof level folks, signing to debates about your work on EJMR is a power move. They are so secure in their position, they don't care if anyone thinks twice about it. It allows them to shift debate about their work/ themselves in a way no one else can.

   3 months ago # QUOTE 4 Good 1 No Good !

6. Economist
   c218
   

   Very interesting!

   2 months ago # QUOTE 4 Good 0 No Good !

7. Economist
   c218
   

   Bernie is a true scholar.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 6 Good 4 No Good !

8. Economist
   8230
   

   I believe the accrual measure is important.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

9. Economist
   c1fb
   

   What do they find?

   2 months ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

10. Economist
    e8e1
    

    Xuan Tian also has a sho paper. What do you think about it?

    2 months ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

11. Economist
    c221
    

    Xuan Tian also has a sho paper. What do you think about it?

    XT is a disgrace. His work is intellectual crap. It should be wiped out from history.

    2 months ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Good !

12. Economist
    22b3
    

    Are you saying bernard black does not understand accounting?

    I believe the accrual measure is important.

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

13. Economist
    9548
    

    Are you saying bernard black does not understand accounting?

    I believe the accrual measure is important.
    

    No you are just revealing that you as a mathburator have inferiority complexity towards game theorists.

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

14. Economist
    7088
    

    Any thoughts on this:

    Reusing Natural Experiments
    Davidson Heath,
    University of Utah
    Matthew C. Ringgenberg,
    University of Utah
    Mehrdad Samadi,
    Southern Methodist University
    Ingrid M. Werner,
    The Ohio State University

    1 month ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

15. Economist
    b6e7
    

    Good paper!

    Any thoughts on this:
    Reusing Natural Experiments
    Davidson Heath,
    University of Utah
    Matthew C. Ringgenberg,
    University of Utah
    Mehrdad Samadi,
    Southern Methodist University
    Ingrid M. Werner,
    The Ohio State University

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

16. Economist
    d3b3
    

    Not sure. Everyone knows the outcome— why write such a paper?

    Good paper!

    Any thoughts on this:
    Reusing Natural Experiments
    Davidson Heath,
    University of Utah
    Matthew C. Ringgenberg,
    University of Utah
    Mehrdad Samadi,
    Southern Methodist University
    Ingrid M. Werner,
    The Ohio State University
    

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

17. Economist
    9226
    

    Quite funny. DH has several working papers using the same experiment. He should test his own papers first!

    Not sure. Everyone knows the outcome— why write such a paper?

    Good paper!

    Any thoughts on this:
    Reusing Natural Experiments
    Davidson Heath,
    University of Utah
    Matthew C. Ringgenberg,
    University of Utah
    Mehrdad Samadi,
    Southern Methodist University
    Ingrid M. Werner,
    The Ohio State University
    

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

18. Economist
    8337
    

    Not sure. Here is the bottom line according to a few people who saw the paper: if you want to use a "natural experiment", do your best to be the first to use it. Also, you have to try EVERY single possible outcome variable to make sure that you write a paper about the variable that generates strongest results against corrections for multiple testing. Who gives a cr*p about economic theory? The authors seem to be overselling it. Useful to deter excessive reg-monkey excitement, but good ideas in need of an exogenous shocks should get a chance. In term of contribution, econ people have established all this in much better work long ago.

    Good paper!

    Any thoughts on this:
    Reusing Natural Experiments
    Davidson Heath,
    University of Utah
    Matthew C. Ringgenberg,
    University of Utah
    Mehrdad Samadi,
    Southern Methodist University
    Ingrid M. Werner,
    The Ohio State University
    

    1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

Reply

Post <blockquote><blockquote>So you are telling me that a lawyer who has never published a single A publication in finance gets to critique an entire literature and call a few hundred authors reg monkeys and p-hackers because he wants to keep finance academia honest. This sounds just as absurd as #Bernie2020socialism# to me. When Cam Harvey points out an issue, I listen because he knows what he is talking about. What has Bernie done exactly? <blockquote>This "he's a lawyer" stuff is pathetic. He's one of the few people keeping the profession honest. Everyone with half a brain knows a minor change to short selling won't affect patenting activities or exec comp. This is why people working in the real world laugh at us. Because people have started seeing publishing as a game instead of as the pursuit of truth. </blockquote></blockquote> Ah, yes, you definitely want an insider to look into it. Maybe appoint a group at the RFS to look into it?</blockquote>

Send Post »

Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.