Using a computer simulation model, a research team at the University of Texas examined differences between historical cost profit and current value profit.24 The computer model simulated the operations of four hypothetical manufacturing companies over a 17-year period, using initial values from Compustat reports on four actual firms. The results of the simulation led to the following conclusions:
• Current value measures perform at least as well as historical cost profit as a prediction of the next year's operating cash flows in almost all conditions examined. Current value performs significantly better than historical cost profit in most situations.
• Dividends paid exceeded current value profit across a broad spectrum of inflationary conditions. Companies with increasing costs combined with declining sales volume are particularly prone to pay dividends out of capital rather than profit.
• Across a broad range of inflationary conditions, the failure of historical cost accounting to adjust for inflation causes dramatic differences between historical cost and current value performance trends (such as rate of return on equity).
Although the benefit of current cost information to users may be acknowledged, there is still the question of whether these benefits exceed the cost of gathering the information.
Dickerson investigated the feasibility of implementing the procedures of current cost accounting in an actual firm, a small producer of molded plastic articles.25 He calculated that he took 95 hours to complete his work; however, many hours were spent in familiarizing himself with the books of the firm. He concluded that for one person already employed by the firm and familiar with its procedures it would take about 45 hours to implement current cost in the first year and about 15 hours thereafter. Of course, this depends on the size of the firm, but he believed that with the use of the computer the time and cost were not likely to increase in direct proportion to size. McKeon, who did a comparative study of different accounting models, estimated the costs of application to be small.2^
Ro conducted an empirical study to determine whether the costs of complying with ASR 190 were significant.27 He concluded that the actual burden of ASR 190 compliance costs was not large relative to the value of the firms. However, studies based on direct contact with certain types of users have yielded mixed conclusions. For example, Gerome surveyed the reactions of 244 chief financial officers to ASR 190 and found that the majority found the guidelines to be inadequate.28 In another analysis of responses to replacement cost accounting, Stanga found that commercial lending officers considered replacement cost data to be more reliable than historical cost data.29 Schwarz Bach and Swanson sent questionnaires to controllers of publicly traded companies. Based on 280 replies, they ascertained that about 50% of the time, current cost information is provided