A THEORY OF UNWINDING OF CROSS‐SHAREHOLDING UNDER MANAGERIAL ENTRENCHMENT

In this article I examine corporate strategies regarding cross‐shareholding and the unwinding of cross‐shareholding, and I present a rationale for corporate managers to unwind cross‐shareholding from the perspective of managerial entrenchment. Although cross‐shareholding enhances managerial entrenchment, the increased agency costs associated with managerial opportunism increase the incentives for a hostile takeover. To avoid a takeover, managers have to unwind cross‐shareholdings. The unwinding of cross‐shareholdings implies that managers will relinquish their entrenchment and thus will act to increase shareholders' wealth in the future. The model proposed here explains why cross‐shareholdings among Japanese firms declined during the 1990s, a decade during which the cost of takeovers decreased because of financial market deregulation.     

KEIRETSU AFFILIATION AND STOCK‐MARKET‐DRIVEN ACQUISITIONS

We examine misvaluation as a driver of takeover activity in Japan. Mirroring empirical results from the United States, we find that overvaluation is an important factor affecting the dichotomy between acquirers and nonacquirers in Japan. Being affiliated to a keiretsu group appears to reduce the probability that an overvalued firm will decide to acquire another firm. Misvaluation is also an important determinant of the likelihood of a firm becoming a target; however, there is no significant difference between keiretsu and nonkeiretsu firms in this regard. Shareholders of keiretsu‐affiliated acquirers do not gain from acquisitions, whereas acquisitions by nonaffiliated firms do seem to be value enhancing.     

Crossing takeover premiums and mix of payment: An empirical test of contractual setting in M&A transactions

The analyses of the tender offer premiums and of the means of payment should not be performed separately. In the empirical literature, these two variables are often considered independently, although they may have an endogenous relationship in a contractual setting. Using a sample of European M&As over the 2000–2010 decade, we show that these two variables are jointly set in a contractual empirical approach. The relationship between the percentage of cash and the offer premium is positive: higher premiums yield payments with more cash.     

Multiple directorships and acquirer returns

This paper examines the impact of multiple directorships on stockholder wealth around the announcements of mergers and acquisitions. Grounded in agency theory, we argue that multiple directorships affect the quality of managerial oversight and thus influence agency conflicts in acquisition decisions. We show that acquiring firms where directors hold more outside board seats experience more negative abnormal returns. This adverse effect, nonetheless, does not extend across the entire range of multiple directorships. Rather, the detrimental impact is significant only when the number of outside board seats surpasses a certain threshold. We interpret this result as suggesting that directors serving on multiple boards allow value-destroying acquisitions when they become too busy beyond a certain point, and the effect of directors’ busyness on acquisition performance appears to be nonlinear. We employ several alternative definitions of directors’ busyness and obtain consistent results.     

Growth LBOs

Using a data set of 839 French deals, we look at the change in corporate behavior following a leveraged buyout (LBO) relative to an adequately chosen control group. In the 3 years following a leveraged buyout, targets become more profitable, grow much faster than their peer group, issue additional debt, and increase capital expenditures. We then provide evidence consistent with the idea that in our sample, private equity funds create value by relaxing credit constraints, allowing LBO targets to take advantage of hitherto unexploited growth opportunities. First, post-buyout growth is concentrated among private-to-private transactions, i.e., deals where the seller is an individual, as opposed to divisional buyouts or public-to-private LBOs where the seller is a private or a public firm. Second, the observed post-buyout growth in size and post-buyout increase in debt and capital expenditures are stronger when the targets operate in an industry that is relatively more dependent on external finance. These results contrast with existing evidence that LBO targets invest less or downsize.     

How much of the diversification discount can be explained by poor corporate governance?

We investigate whether the diversification discount occurs partly as an artifact of poor corporate governance. In panel data models, we find that the discount narrows by 16% to 21% when we add governance variables as regression controls. We also estimate Heckman selection models that account for the endogeneity of diversification and dynamic panel generalized method of moments models that account for the endogeneity of both diversification and governance. We find that the diversification discount persists even with these controls for endogeneity. However, in selection models the discount disappears entirely when we introduce governance variables in the second stage, and in dynamic panel GMM models the discount narrows by 37% when we include governance variables.     

Do firms have leverage targets? Evidence from acquisitions

In the context of large acquisitions, we provide evidence on whether firms have target capital structures. We examine how deviations from these targets affect how bidders choose to finance acquisitions and how they adjust their capital structure following the acquisitions. We show that when a bidder's leverage is over its target level, it is less likely to finance the acquisition with debt and more likely to finance the acquisition with equity. Also, we find a positive association between the merger-induced changes in target and actual leverage, and we show that bidders incorporate more than two-thirds of the change to the merged firm's new target leverage. Following debt-financed acquisitions, managers actively move the firm back to its target leverage, reversing more than 75% of the acquisition's leverage effect within five years. Overall, our results are consistent with a model of capital structure that includes a target level and adjustment costs.     

Small business groups enhance performance and promote stability, not expropriation. Evidence from French SMEs

This paper investigates the influence that a firm’s distance from control has on its performance, using balance sheet information and a unique data set on small business ownership. This study fills a gap in the empirical governance literature by investigating whether there is expropriation of minority shareholders in small business groups. Contrary to observations for large business groups, results show a positive relationship between the separation of control from ownership and firm performance. Results also underline that tunneling promotes controlling shareholders’ profit stability rather than profit maximization in small business groups.     

Form versus substance: The effect of ownership structure and corporate governance on firm value in Thailand

We examine the relation between the quality of corporate governance practices and firm value for Thai firms, which often have complex ownership structures. We develop a comprehensive measure of corporate governance and show that, in contrast to conventional measures of corporate governance, our measurement, on average, is positively associated with Tobin’s q. Furthermore, we find that q values are lower for firms that exhibit deviations between cash flow rights and voting rights. We also find that the value benefits of complying with “good” corporate governance practices are nullified in the presence of pyramidal ownership structures, raising doubts on the effectiveness of governance measures when ownership structures are not transparent. We conclude that family control of firms through pyramidal ownership structures can allow firms to seemingly comply with preferred governance practices but also use the control to their advantage.     

Control considerations,creditor monitoring,and the capital structure of family firms

In this paper, I analyze the motives moving founders and their families to influence the capital structure decision. For this, I complement detailed corporate governance information for Germany with data from other countries. The results for the German bank-based financial system contradict prior findings for other institutional environments. According to these results, family firms in Germany rely less heavily on debt than non-family firms. Less surprisingly, the opposite holds true for the international dataset. Different empirical tests indicate that this puzzling result can be explained by control considerations. Founders and their families use the capital structure to optimize their control over the firm. However, whether family firms rely more or less on debt depends on the level of creditor monitoring in an institutional environment. These findings emphasize that control considerations of major shareholders are important—although often overlooked—determinants of the capital structure.     

Corporate life cycle and M&A activity

We investigate the impact of corporate life cycle on takeover activity from the perspective of acquiring firms. Using the earned/contributed capital mix as the proxy for firm life cycle, we find a highly significant and positive relation between firm life cycle and the likelihood of becoming a bidder. This finding is, however, driven by the mature rather than the old acquirers in the sample. Further we find that, whilst firm life cycle has a positive effect on the probability that a deal will be negotiated, it is negatively related to tender offers. In addition, the likelihood of making both cash and mixed deals are positively related to the corporate life cycle. Finally, we find that life cycle has a negative impact on the abnormal returns generated on the announcement of a deal although it is unable to distinguish between the returns received by firms at different stages in their life cycle.     

Corporate performance, managerial ownership and endogeneity: A simultaneous equations analysis for the Athens stock exchange

This paper investigates the relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance by considering the endogenous nature of the ownership variables. We conducted our analysis by applying a simultaneous equations framework. We empirically controlled the direction and significance of this relationship, using a panel comprised of 146 firms quoted on the Athens Stock Exchange between 2000 and 2004. The main findings of our analysis indicated that when managerial ownership is treated as endogenous, there is a positive impact on corporate value. Given the particularly high degree of managerial ownership that is observed in the firms listed in the Athens Stock Exchange, we argue that the estimated positive relationship can be mainly explained by the existing high levels of managerial ownership.     

Approval of shareholder-sponsored proposals: Evidence from Canada

Little is known about shareholder voting at firms incorporated outside of the United States. Proposals sponsored at such firms and the voting patterns and factors associated with these proposals should conceivably be similar to those in the U.S. if the legal and governance structures of the countries are similar. We examine 264 shareholder proposals sponsored at Canadian firms between 2001 and 2005 in order to determine if differences created by the Canadian governance system, being more voluntary than that of the U.S. system, lead to differences in shareholder voting. We find many similarities between voting at the Canadian firms and those found in the literature for their U.S. counterparts, including some types of frequently submitted proposals and factors impacting the level of shareholder approval. However, unlike the concurrent literature on U.S. firms, we find very few majority approved proposals and a much lower overall level of affirmative voting returns.     

Pyramidal ownership and the creation of new firms

We study the role of pyramidal ownership structures in the creation of new firms. Our results suggest that pyramids arise because they provide a financing advantage in setting up new firms when the pledgeability of cash flows to outside financiers is limited. Parent companies supply inside funds to new firms that, due to large investment requirements and low pledgeable cash flows, cannot raise enough external financing. The financing advantage of pyramidal structures is pervasive in many countries, exists regardless of whether new firms are set up by business groups or by smaller organizations, and is an important underpinning of entrepreneurial activity.     

Information asymmetry and international strategic alliances

This paper examines how information asymmetry affects cross-border strategic alliance formation by US firms over the period 2000–2008. We construct a measure, information costs, based on both geographical distance and the proportion of worldwide GDP the partner’s home country represents. Consistent with our expectations, we find an inverse association between information costs and cross-border strategic alliances. When considering the proportion of alliances formed with publicly quoted overseas partners, we find this is unaffected by the level of information costs but rather the level of stock market development, tax rate and general economic conditions. Information costs are, however, significantly negatively related to alliances with overseas private organizations. Our results offer clear support for the on-going importance of information asymmetry in corporate decision making.     

The sources of value destruction in acquisitions by entrenched managers

Prior work has established that entrenched managers make value-decreasing acquisitions. In this study, we determine how they destroy that value. Overall, we find that value destruction by entrenched managers comes from a combination of factors. First, they disproportionately avoid private targets, which have been shown to be generally associated with value creation. Second, when they do buy private targets or public targets with blockholders, they tend not to use all-equity offers, which has the effect of avoiding the transfer of a valuable blockholder to the bidder. We further test whether entrenched managers simply overpay for good targets or choose targets with lower synergies. We find that while they overpay, they also choose low synergy targets in the first place, as shown by combined announcement returns and post-merger operating performance.