How Much Is Too Much: Are Merger Premiums Too High?

Is it too much to pay target firm shareholders a 50% premium on top of market price? Or is it too much to pay a 100% premium when pursuing mergers and acquisitions? How much is too much? In this paper, we examine how the extent of merger premiums paid impacts both the long‐run and announcement period stock returns of acquiring firms. We find no evidence that acquirers paying high premiums underperform those paying relatively low premiums in three years following mergers, and the result is robust after controlling for a variety of firm and deal characteristics. Short term cumulative abnormal returns are moreover positively correlated to the level of the premium paid by acquirers. Our evidence therefore suggests that high merger premiums paid are unlikely to be responsible for acquirers' long‐run post merger underperformance.     

DIRECT EVIDENCE ON THE MARKET‐DRIVEN ACQUISITION THEORY

We provide direct empirical evidence that share overvaluation is an important motive for firms to make stock acquisitions. We find that more overvalued firms are more likely to acquire with stock, and acquirers are more overvalued in successful stock mergers than in withdrawn mergers. Acquirers' overvaluation, on average, exceeds the targets' premium‐adjusted overvaluation. Shareholders of stock acquirers, whose overvaluation is greater than their targets' premium‐adjusted overvaluation, realize sustained wealth gains from one day before the merger announcement up to three years after the merger completion, as compared with a matching sample of similarly overvalued but nonacquiring firms.     

LABOR MARKET CONSEQUENCES FOR BUSY DIRECTORS: EVIDENCE FROM INTERNATIONAL MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS

Using 13,233 acquisitions from 57 countries, we examine merger and acquisition (M&A) decisions made by busy boards. We find that few busy acquirers originate from emerging markets and that they tend to undertake cross‐border mergers, favor public targets, finance with cash and equity, pursue nondiversifying mergers, avoid targets with multiple bidders, and long‐term underperform relative to nonbusy acquirers. Importantly, we discover a nonlinear relation between an acquirer's board busyness and merger announcement returns. We find that the labor market penalizes directors who approve bad acquisitions but does not reward them for good mergers. We find a similar nonlinear relation between an acquirer's board busyness and its long‐term performance along with a suggestion of an optimal board busyness.     

Market reaction to the merger announcements of US banks: A non-parametric X-efficiency framework

This paper investigates the short-term market reaction of nine profit-efficiency, pre-classified merger deals of US banks over the time period from 1992 to 2003. The findings show that mergers combining low efficiency acquirers and targets create significant market returns following the merger event, while mergers combining the least efficient acquirers with moderately efficient targets diminish the acquirer's wealth more than any other type of merger. Furthermore, findings show that acquirers generally lose about 2.5% of their wealth upon the merger announcement while targets experience, on average, significant market returns of 15.5% following the merger announcement.The findings of the cross sectional analysis show that the CARs of acquirers are positively related to their technical efficiency and geographic diversification, while targets' CARs are negatively related to both target size and revenue efficiency.     

Acquirer-target social ties and merger outcomes

This article investigates the effect of social ties between acquirers and targets on merger performance. We find that the extent of cross-firm social connection between directors and senior executives at the acquiring and the target firms has a significantly negative effect on the abnormal returns to the acquirer and to the combined entity upon merger announcement. Moreover, acquirer-target social ties significantly increase the likelihood that the target firm?s chief executive officer (CEO) and a larger fraction of the target firm?s pre-acquisition board of directors remain on the board of the combined firm after the merger. In addition, we find that acquirer CEOs are more likely to receive bonuses and are more richly compensated for completing mergers with targets that are highly connected to the acquiring firms, that acquisitions are more likely to take place between two firms that are well connected to each other through social ties, and that such acquisitions are more likely to subsequently be divested for performance-related reasons. Taken together, our results suggest that social ties between the acquirer and the target lead to poorer decision making and lower value creation for shareholders overall.     

Cross-ownership,returns, and voting in mergers

We show that institutional shareholders of acquiring companies on average do not lose money around public merger announcements, because they hold substantial stakes in the targets and make up for the losses from the acquirers with the gains from the targets. Depending on their holdings in the target, acquirer shareholders generally realize different returns from the same merger, some losing money and others gaining. This conflict of interest is reflected in the mutual fund voting behavior: In mergers with negative acquirer announcement returns, cross-owners are significantly more likely to vote for the merger.     

Does carbon risk matter for corporate acquisition decisions?

In this study, we examine whether carbon risk matters in acquisitions. Using a firm's carbon emissions to proxy for carbon risk, we examine whether an acquirer's level of carbon emissions is related to the decision to engage in acquisitions and achieve subsequent acquisition returns. The results show that firms with higher emissions have an increased likelihood of acquiring foreign targets while, at the same time, having a decreased likelihood of acquiring domestic targets. Acquirers with large carbon footprints seek out targets in foreign countries that have low gross domestic product (GDP) or weak environmental, regulatory, or governance standards. We also examine the relationship between carbon emissions and announcement returns. We find that cross-border acquisition announcement returns are higher when acquirers with high carbon emissions acquire targets in countries with fewer regulations or weaker environmental standards. Focusing on the interplay of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and carbon emissions, we find that investors censure acquirers that promote CSR while also having high carbon emissions, thus resulting in worse abnormal returns. This is particularly the case if the target country is wealthy or has stronger country governance or strong environmental protection. Our findings add insight on the channels through which a focus on reducing carbon risk can add value for shareholders.     

The market valuation of M&A announcements in the United Kingdom

This paper investigates the short-term market reaction to UK acquirers announcing domestic and foreign mergers and acquisitions (M&As) from 2000 to 2010. We define acquirers as value, moderate and glamour acquirers based on equally weighted market-to-book terciles. We find that value acquirers outperform glamour acquirers during and after the M&A announcement. We also focus on the impact of institutional ownership and find that higher domestic, foreign and total institutional ownership leads to lower market reaction to M&A announcements. We also find that long-term institutional investors lead to a higher post-announcement market performance. Finally, we find that greater domestic institutional ownership mitigates the typical poor short-term performance following M&A announcements of glamour acquirers.     

Understanding merger incentives and outcomes in the US mutual fund industry

This paper examines the incentives of acquirers and targets in the merger market. Using data on acquisitions among mutual fund management companies from 1991 to 2004, I estimate a two-sided matching model of the merger market jointly with equations representing merger outcomes. According to the empirical investigation, although the desire to achieve a sufficient scale to attract investors is a key driver for mergers, some mergers seem to be driven by objectives other than shareholder value maximization. I find that companies that are potentially prone to misaligned incentives between owners and managers are more acquisitive than others, yet have significantly worse post-merger operating performance. I also find that these acquirers, despite their higher willingness to pay for targets, are not any more likely to match with high-quality targets, potentially due to targets’ incentive to avoid bad organizations.     

Sources of value gains in minority equity investments by private equity funds: Evidence from block share acquisitions

Using block share acquisitions made by private equity (PE) funds, we examine the sources of value gains in PE minority equity investments. We find that compared with non-PE acquirers, PE acquirers are more likely to place representatives with finance experience or those with experience in the target's industry on the target's board when the need for target oversight and/or advice is higher. The targets in PE acquisitions, particularly poorly performing targets, targets with high R&D intensity, and targets with PE-appointed directors who have experience in the target's industry, realize both higher announcement returns and better post-acquisition operating performance than do targets in non-PE acquisitions. These findings suggest that the governance and operational engineering that PE acquirers apply to their targets constitutes important sources of value creation in PE minority equity investments.