Abstract | Keywords | Export | Availability | Bookmark

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

In answer to the economic crisis, to the scandals and to the frauds, the risk of reputation has emerged (Trotta, Iannuzzi, & Pacelli, 2016). Moreover, the increased power given to regulators (Van Erp, 2013) to disclose penalties including the names of offenders amplified the risk. The media representation of these penalties can seriously damage the reputation of financial institutions concerned.
In this context, we study the quantitative impact of the publication of sanctions by UK and French regulators and the qualitative impact of the first media representation of penalties on the reputational risk of UK financial institutions. 
The sample for the publication of sanctions by the UK regulator is formed on the basis of the year 2013 whereas the sample for the publication of sanctions by the French regulator is formed on the basis of the period from December 2006 to July 2017. The results show an insignificant impact of the publication of sanctions on the abnormal returns. Therefore, the risk of reputation is low. However, we note that the coefficient of determination was diverging. This calls into question the use of good market indexes in the literature. 
Regarding the first media representation, we analyse in-depth three press articles appeared before the settlement date of sanctions and we find that the press has chosen to cover financial scandals. The content of these articles reflected an opposition to the regulation (“anti-regulation”). The choice and the content of the press limit the impact on the reputation because it tells the facts like structural problems.

Reputational risk --- Media representation --- Abnormal return --- Financial market regulators --- Administrative sanctions --- Publication of sanctions --- Financial institution --- Sciences économiques & de gestion > Finance