An Examination of Stock Performance: The Three Top-Performing Lodging Firms August 1987 - January 1990

A study published in the Fall 1988 issue of the FIU Hospitality Review revealed that the top three lodging stock performers during the period July 1982 to January 1988 were Prime Motor Inns, Inc., Marriott Corporation, and Hilton Hotels Corporation. The author has completed a follow-up study in an attempt to determine how selected lodging firms have fared since the summer rally of 1987 (which preceded the stock crash of October 19, 1987) until more recent times.

An Analysis of Stock Market Performance:The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Three Top Performing Lodging Firma: 1982-1988

In their dialogue - An Analysis of Stock Market Performance: The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Three Top Performing Lodging Firms 1982 – 1988 - by N. H. Ringstrom, Professor and Elisa S. Moncarz, Associate Professor, School of Hospitality Management at Florida International University, Professors Ringstrom and Moncarz state at the outset: “An interesting comparison can be made between the Dow Jones lndustrial Average and the three top performing, publicly held lodging firms which had $100 million or more in annual lodging revenues. The authors provide that analytical comparison with Prime Motor Inns Inc., the Marriott Corporation, and Hilton Hotels Corporation.” “Based on a criterion of size, only those with $100 million in annual lodging revenues or more resulted in the inclusion of the following six major hotel firms: Prime Motor Inns, Inc., Marriott Corporation, Hilton Hotels Corporation, Ramada Inc., Holiday Corporation and La Quinta Motor Inns, Inc.,” say Professors Ringstrom and Moncarz in framing this discussion with its underpinnings in the years 1982 to 1988. The article looks at each company’s fiscal and Dow Jones performance for the years in question, and presents a detailed analysis of said performance. Graphic analysis is included. It helps to have a fairly vigorous knowledge of stock market and fiscal examination criteria to digest this material. The Ringstrom and Moncarz analysis of Prime Motor Inns Incorporated occupies the first 7 pages of this article in and of itself. Marriot Corporation also occupies a prominent position in this discussion. “Marriott, a giant in the hospitality industry, is huge and continuing to grow. Its 1987 sales were more than $6.5 billion, and its employees numbered over 200,000 individuals, which place Marriott among the 10 largest private employers in the country,” Ringstrom and Moncarz parse Marriott’s influence as a significant financial player. “The firm has a fantastic history of growth over the past 60 years, starting in May 1927 with a nine-seat A & W Root Beer stand in Washington, D.C.,” offer the authors in initialing Marriot’s portion of the discussion with a brief history lesson. The Marriot firm was officially incorporated as Hot Shoppes Inc. in 1929. As the thesis statement for the discussion suggests the performance of these huge, hospitality giants is compared and contrasted directly to the Dow Jones Industrial Average performance. Reasons and empirical data are offered by the authors to explain the distinctions. It would be difficult to explain those distinctions without delving deeply into corporate financial history and the authors willingly do so in an effort to help you understand the growth, as well as some of the setbacks of these hospitality based juggernauts. Ringstrom and Moncarz conclude the article with an extensive overview and analysis of the Hilton Hotels Corporation performance for the period outlined. It may well be the most fiscally dynamic of the firms presented for your perusal. “It is interesting to note that Hilton Hotels Corporation maintained a very strong financial position with relatively little debt during the years 1982-1988…the highest among all companies in the study,” the authors paint.

Process of privatization: Benefits of *reform in management of public housing

The study of the private management of public housing is an important topic to be critically analyzed as the government search for ways to increase efficiency in providing housing for the poor. Public Housing Authorities must address the cost for repairing or replacing the deteriorating housing stock, the increase in the need for affordable housing, and the lack of supply. There is growing pressure on efficient use of public funds that has heightened the need for profound structural reform. An important strategy for carrying out such reform is through privatization. Although privatization does not work in every case, the majority position in the traditional privatization literature is that reliance on private organizations normally, but not always, results in cost savings. ^ The primary purpose of this dissertation is to determine whether a consensus exist among decision-makers on the efficiency of privatizing the management of public housing. A secondary purpose is to review the techniques (best practices) used by the private sector that results in cost-efficiencies in the management of public housing. The study employs the use of a triangulated research design utilizing cross-sectional survey methodology that included use of a survey instrument to solicit responses from the private managers. The study consists of qualitative methods using interviews from key informants of private-sector management firms and public housing agencies, case studies, focus groups, archival records and housing authorities documents. ^ Results indicated that important decision-makers perceive that private managers made a positive contribution to cost-efficiencies in the management of public housing. The performance of private contractors served as a yardstick for comparison of efficiency of services that are produced in-house. The study concluded that private managers made the benefits of their management techniques well known creating a sense of competition between public and private managers. Competition from private contractors spurred municipal worker and management productivity improvements creating better management results for the public housing authorities. The study results are in concert with a review of recent research and studies that also concluded private managers have some distinct advantages to controlling costs in the management of public housing. ^