Causes and consequences of Cash Flow Sensitivity: Empirical Tests of the US Lodging Industry

Journal of Hospitality Financial Management, Sep 2017

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the causes and consequence of cash flow sensitivity. While cash flow has been regarded as an agency problem, empirical investigations in context of managerial conservatism or optimizing behavior are limited. In this paper we investigate two key aspects of cash flow sensitivity: whether cash flow sensitivity causes variations in fixed asset investments; and if cash flow variations are caused by managerial conservatism. Theoretical models are empirically tested in the US lodging sector. This overall understanding of cash flow sensitivity in the lodging industry through our study contributes to hospitality literature to the study of liquidity management practices, capital formation, and investment behavior, and how these are related to overall risk profile of the firm.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1165&context=jhfm

Causes and consequences of Cash Flow Sensitivity: Empirical Tests of the US Lodging Industry

Journal of Hospitality Financial Management Causes and consequences of Cash Flow Sensitivity: Empirical Tests of the US Lodging Industr y Financial Management Educators CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CASH FLOW SENSITIVITY: EMPIRICAL TESTS OF THE US LODGING INDUSTRY Amit Sharma And Arun Upneja ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to investigate the causes and consequence of cash flow sensitivity. While cash flow has been regarded as an agency problem, empirical investigations in context of managerial conservatism or optimizing behavior are limited. In this paper we investigate two key aspects of cash flow sensitivity: whether cash flow sensitivity causes variations in fixed asset investments; and if cash flow variations are caused by managerial conservatism. Theoretical models are empirically tested in the US lodging sector. This overall understanding of cash flow sensitivity in the lodging industry through our study contributes to hospitality literature to the study of liquidity management practices, capital formation, and investment behavior, and how these are related to overall risk profile of the firm. Introduction Cash flows are critical for operational success of businesses, especially those in the hospitality industry due to the shorter lifecycle of transactions, demand uncertainty, and high levels of fixed costs. Variations in the level of internal cash flows can place financial restraints on the firm and force it to either source external financing for operational and investment needs, or relinquish opportunities. There are two aspects to this issue: first, how variations in cash flows impact investments; and second, what causes variations in cash flows. Relationship between cash flow sensitivity and investment behavior of firms has been studied extensively outside of the hospitality industry, and remains a highly controversial issue. Part of the literature shows that cash flow variance does impact investments while the other part of the literature claims that this relationship is influenced by the financial constraints of the firm. Investigating how this relationship exists in hospitality firms could provide interesting results. If cash flow demands in these firms are indeed higher than in other industries, then one would expect that investments will remain highly correlated to cash flow variations despite financial constraints. However, what remains relatively obscure, are the reasons for variations in cash flows. Two possible explanations could be hypothesized: the first reason can be that the firm is financially constrained, assuming it is maximizing profitability. The second reason is that the management is somehow unable to act in the interest of the owners, thereby producing suboptimal returns and internal cash flows. The second reason has been conceptualized in the literature but has not been empirically tested due to difficulties in identifying observable proxies for management actions. In this paper we present a model and empirically test it to understand how management actions may be causing cash flow sensitivities. Two critical contributions of this investigation are as follows: first, investigating the causes of cash flow variance will be a contribution to mainstream finance literature, and second, understanding the correlation between cash flow variance and investments in the lodging industry will provide an added perspective to the controversy surrounding this issue. Overall, this paper will also help explain how lodging firms manage liquidity and make investments in this context. Literature Review Fazzari et al (1988 ) discuss that most investment models are based on the assumption that firms are able to respond, through their cost of capital, to the prices set by centralized securities market. An alternative way of analyzing investments is to emphasize the importance of internal cash flows due to their relatively lower costs versus external funds. This approach has led to the emergence of the literature that has analyzed correlations between cash flows and investments. Recent imperfections that been discovered in debt and equity markets have further given credence to this notion that firms that do not have access to external markets must mostly rely on internal sources of funds. The paper by Fazzari et al (1988 ) marks the beginning of this discussion (and controversy) that later emerged regarding cash flows-investments correlation. Their investigation reveals that cash flows are indeed correlated to investments and this correlation is particularly stronger in those firms that are financially constrained. This later finding is challenged by Kaplan and Zingales (1997). They based their investigation on Fazzari et al’s (1988 ) results and show an almost reverses relationship – firms that are less financially constrained have higher correlation between investments and cash flows versus those that have higher financial constraints. Based on these results they emphasize that (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1165&context=jhfm

Amit Sharma, Arun Upneja. Causes and consequences of Cash Flow Sensitivity: Empirical Tests of the US Lodging Industry, Journal of Hospitality Financial Management, 2018, Volume 15, Issue 1,