MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104136906 · doi:10.1002/bref.94

Financial performance effects of synthetic leases

2003· article· en· W2104136906 on OpenAlexaff
Kreag Danvers, Alan Reinstein, L. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Real Estate Finance · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaseProfitability indexFinanceBusinessControl (management)Actuarial scienceSample (material)AccountingEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines selected financial performance measures of companies using synthetic leases. First, an example is provided of some advantages of using a synthetic lease. Synthetic lease announcements are then identified for retail and manufacturing sectors from 1997–2002 through Academic LexisNexis searches, and performance measures statistically compared from pre‐ to post‐disclosure for synthetic lease companies, relative to a control sample of companies. While observing some differences in interest coverage and profitability across samples in the year prior to lease disclosure, logistic regression results indicate that the measures do not statistically discriminate between synthetic lease and control companies. These findings suggest that the level at which companies use synthetic leases does not appear to significantly influence basic financial performance measures. Besides showing the little ‘real’ benefit of establishing such types of leases for non‐economic reasons, the results suggest that capital allocation decisions should focus on the substance rather than the form of such synthetic lease transactions. Copyright © 2003 Henry Stewart Publications

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBriefings in Real Estate FinanceSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207