Are Bank Mergers Good News for Shareholders? The Effect of Bank Mergers on Shareholder Value in Japan

This study investigates the effects of bank mergers on the welfare of affiliated client firms. The findings demonstrate that, in general, bank mergers increase the welfare of client firms. However, there are significant differences in the impact of a bank merger on client firms across different merger, bank, and firm characteristics. Client firms of banks involved in mega‐mergers do not enjoy an increase in welfare. Client firms of undercapitalized banks in fact suffer significant welfare losses. In the long‐run, weak “zombie” firms also in many cases experience welfare losses following the announcement of a merger by their main bank.     

Sequential Mergers and Antitrust Authority’s Decisions in Stackelberg Markets

This paper analyses a sequential merger formation game in a setting where: (i) firms compete à la Stackelberg; (ii) mergers may give rise to endogenous efficiency gains; and (iii) every merger has to be submitted for approval to the Antitrust Authority (AA). Two different types of AA are studied: first, we assume a myopic AA, which accepts or rejects a given merger without considering that this merger may be followed by other mergers; and, second, a forward looking AA, which anticipates the final industry structure a merger will give rise to, if approved. We conclude that these two types of AA adopt similar decisions whenever a merger would not trigger the exit of outsider firms. Their decisions are, however, shown to be very different when evaluating exit-inducing merger proposals.     

Impact of Horizontal Mergers on Research & Development and Patenting: Evidence from Merger Challenges in the U.S.

This paper contributes further empirical evidence on the effects of mergers on innovation using company level data. Evidence on this issue has implications for the relationship between innovation and market concentration. Our departure from previous work is that we focus on a sample of horizontal mergers whose market concentration impacts were flagged by U.S. antitrust authorities as potentially posing a problem for antitrust law compliance. We employ propensity score matching and difference-in-differences estimation to compare the innovation activities of challenged and non-challenged merger firms to a control group of non-merged firms. We use R&D, patent grants, and citation-weighted patent grants to measure the innovation activities of firms before and after a merger. Our results indicate that the post-merger innovation outcomes of firms whose mergers were challenged are lower than they would have been had the firms not merged. But for non-challenged mergers, or mergers that do not raise concerns about market concentration, post-merger innovation outcomes are not significantly different from what they would have been without a merger.     

Barbarians at the Gates: State Control of Global Mergers and Acquisitions

Cross‐border mergers and acquisitions are a major and often politicised component of foreign direct investment. Using data on individual transactions between 1970 and 2006, we examine the restrictions countries place on mergers and acquisitions, whether they use these controls to discriminate against foreigners seeking to acquire domestic firms, and what factors may predict the propensity to block foreign entry by this method of direct investment. Drawing partly on the existing literature, we test hypotheses that state intervention can be explained by characteristics of the countries whose firms are targeted by acquirers, including per capita income, democracy, trade exposure, market size, government share of national income and industrial structure. Although democracy, trade exposure and high government expenditure are associated with more stringent merger control laws, none of these attributes cause states to discriminate against cross‐border mergers. Countries with high per capita incomes, large markets and strict merger control laws, do use those regulations to discourage foreign acquirers. A second set of tests, based on observations of individual deals, rather than national aggregates, reveal that governments are particularly averse to foreigners acquiring firms that are bankrupt or in the defence sector. Overall, governments do treat cross‐border mergers and acquisitions differently, and use their merger control laws to discriminate against foreign investors, particularly with respect to certain types of transactions.     

Capital Structure and Mergers: Retrospective Evidence from a Natural Experiment

This analysis evaluates the impact of corporate debt in influencing mergers of local exchange companies in the United States telecommunications industry between 1988 and 2001. Firms’ financial structures significantly affect behavior and performance; yet no evidence has shown how firms’ financial structures influence their merger activities. The impact of corporate debt levels on the various mergers that took place during the merger wave in the sector is significantly negative for the first set of mergers carried out, and significantly negative, but with smaller impact, for the second set of mergers. The results support the idea that firms with high debt levels can be monitored carefully, precluding engagement in potentially-risky mergers so as to not engender negative financial outcomes.     

Setting Upper Limits on Merger Related Efficiencies

The purpose of this paper is to show that a complementary entry analysis could be performed by the authorities when assessing the welfare impacts of a merger. In addition to analyzing the likelihood and impact of post-merger entry by other firms, the authorities could also study pre-merger alternatives for the insiders, that is, to study wether other concentration operations were available but not chosen by the merging or acquiring firms. This may be particularly useful when the authorities are faced with a concentration operation that raises anti-competitive concerns. Insiders will argue that cost reductions are likely to compensate these negative effects. However, if the cost reductions are not firm specific it is possible, in some circumstances, to establish an upper limit on the extent of cost reductions when there are other mergers available. If these mergers were admissible but were dominated by the present one, information is revealed about the extent of cost reductions. This information may lead to the authorities updating their beliefs on efficiencies. Such updates may lead to the modification of the decision to approve or reject the merger.     

Partial or total integration in a cross‐border merger? Building a Nordic bank culture

The rate of failure for international mergers and acquisitions (M&As) is exceptionally high, since the integration of merging firms does not function well. Using a process perspective, this study aims to analyze the integration process in a cross‐border merger and the development of a common organizational culture. A framework based on premerger cultural and organizational fit, synergy, and resulting organizational culture is developed to study the growth of Nordea, a merger of four Nordic banks. Data include in‐depth interviews and secondary sources. This case study shows how cultural and managerial differences are dealt with and synergies realized. Building a broad organizational culture involving human resource management, decision making, technology, competitiveness, and customer relationships is necessary for merger integration, but it is costly and difficult. We suggest that success in mergers lies in managers creating a new cultural identity with unique values and perspectives.     

Industry Merger Intensity and Cost of Capital

Using a panel of industry‐average implied cost of equity capital and the value of prior year aggregate industry mergers, we find strong evidence that the industry cost of equity capital is negatively associated with industry merger activity. Our evidence is consistent with greater media coverage, analyst following, or increase in investor attention associated with industry merger activity lowering the required return on equity for firms in an industry that is not involved in merger activity via the ‘information risk’ or ‘incomplete information’ channels.     

Merger Impacts on Investor Expectations: An Event Study for Australia

In previous work, little evidence of share‐price response to Australian price‐fixing investigations was found. However, these investigations often involve a small part of a company’s operations and antitrust penalties have tended to be relatively small; in fact, some weak support was found for a greater response by investors when penalties were expected to be more significant. Mergers, on the other hand, clearly represent a much more significant event, and we would anticipate a clearer share‐price response both to announced mergers and to associated antitrust challenges. While such studies have been done in other countries (primarily for the US), we know of no prior research of this sort for Australia. In this paper we focus on a sample of about 50 mergers and acquisitions involving Australian companies from 1996 to 2003, examining the impact on share prices of the announcement of these mergers both on the firms involved and on rival firms. For those which were challenged by the Australian antitrust enforcers, we also consider the impact of the announcement of such a challenge.     

Trade Liberalisation,Market Structure and the Incentive to Merge

In this article, we consider whether a movement towards freer international trade generates incentives for firms to merge and if so what forms of merger are most profitable. In a linear Cournot framework, we show that a reduction in trade costs may, but will not necessarily, encourage mergers. Both market structure and the level to which trade costs fall are shown to play a decisive role. Domestic mergers will be encouraged only if the product market is not highly concentrated and trade costs fall below a threshold level. International mergers can be encouraged in any market structure, and are generally more profitable than domestic mergers.     

Mergers Among German Cooperative Banks: A Panel-based Stochastic Frontier Analysis

Based on an unbalanced panel of all Bavarian cooperative banks for the years of 1989--97, which includes information on 283 mergers, we analyze motives and cost effects of small-scale mergers in German banking. Estimating a frontier cost function with a time-variable stochastic efficiency term, we show that positive scale and scope effects from a merger arise only if the merged unit closes part of the former branch network. When we compare actual mergers to a simulation of hypothetical mergers, size effects of observed mergers turn out to be slightly more favorable than for all possible mergers. Banks taken over by others are less efficient than the average bank in the same size class, but exhibit, on average, the same efficiency as the acquiring firms. For the post-merger phase, our empirical results provide no evidence for efficiency gains from merging, but point instead to a leveling off of differences among the merging units.     

Competitiveness of Firm Behavior and Public Policy for New Technology Adoption in an Oligopoly

Economic growth requires that firms adopt new technologies. However, it may be insufficient or excessive in less competitive industries from the social welfare point of view. In this case, a government subsidy or tax is necessary. We analyze the optimum subsidy or tax policy for new technology adoption by firms when firms maximize the weighted average of absolute and relative profits. We do not consider that firms really maximize the weighted average, but the weight on the relative profit is used as a parameter indicating competitiveness of firm behavior. We show that the optimum policy is likely to be subsidization (or taxation) when the set-up cost for new technology adoption is large (or small). It is likely to be subsidization (or taxation) when competitiveness is large (or small), that is, it is near to perfect competition (or joint profit maximization).     

The impact of mergers in banking : Evidence from a nationwide sample of federally chartered banks

Spurred by deregulation, cost, and risk factors, commercial bank mergers have accelerated sharply in recent years. Many banks appear to be positioning themselves for the advent of interstate banking through holding company or reciprocal branching arrangements. Yet, the performance effects of mergers among operating U.S. banks (as opposed to holding company acquisitions) have been examined both infrequently and inconclusively. This study focuses upon the characteristics and performance effects of national bank mergers occurring during the 1970–1980 period. Acquiring national banks were found to have lower operating efficiency and productivity than nonmerging banks and their profitability did not increase following the mergers, but credit availability, productivity, loan losses, deposit service charges, and interest-rate risk did rise. Frequency of merger activity did not significantly influence bank profitability or growth, but did augment stockholder risks and increase business and real-estate credit. In the aggregate, national bank mergers appeared to result neither in significant service benefits nor in significant service costs to the public.Spurred by deregulation of the industry, rising cost pressures, and increased operating risk, merger transactions among U.S. banks have soared in recent years. During the 1982–1986 period, for example, banking led all other industries in the number of consummated mergers and consistently was among the ten leading U.S. industries in the estimated market value of merger agreements. Moreover, the recent upsurge in reciprocal interstate banking agreements and proposals for fully legalized interstate banking hold out the prospect for a further acceleration in bank merger transactions in the years ahead. In view of the fact that legislation in more than 30 states now permits some form of interstate banking by merger or de novo entry and a June 1985 ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court has legitimized regional banking compacts, the public and private impact of bank mergers becomes of much greater importance as a research focus.Despite the magnitude of recent bank merger transactions and their implications for the public, the research literature in this area is surprisingly meager and often contradictory. This article is an attempt to focus more sharply on recent research findings, provide additional evidence concerning the effects of mergers on the financial performance of banks, and assess their impact on the public's interest in an adequate supply of financial services.     

Company Taxation and Merger Incentives in International Oligopoly: on International Policy Coordination with Strategic Trade

We analyse how national taxation of firms is likely to affect merger incentives in international markets. In particular, we ask whether non-coordinated trade policies stimulate cross-border mergers that are overall inefficient, and if this then is an argument for international coordination of such policies? We address this issue in a setting where policy makers use two-part tariffs to tax exporting firms. The analysis reveals that while non-coordinated policies may induce cross-border mergers by allowing the firms in question to play national policy makers out against each other, this can nevertheless be overall welfare enhancing compared to market outcomes under coordinated policy making.     

Recent patterns of European merger activity

In this paper, Paul Geroski and Anastassios Vlassopoulos review recent European merger activity in the light of 1992, and draw two major conclusions. First, cross-border European mergers have increased over the last five years, adding up to nearly 30 per cent of the total number of mergers by European Community firms in 1988. Second, although the big British acquisitions are still taking place in America, UK firms have changed their behaviour in 1989, acquiring more European Community firms than American ones.     

Consequences of Riding Takeover Waves: Australian Evidence

This paper uses Australian data to analyze takeover bid premiums and long‐term abnormal returns for mergers that occur during wave and non‐wave periods. Findings reveal that bid premiums are slightly lower in wave periods, and bidding firms earn normal post‐takeover returns (relative to a portfolio of firms matched on size and survival) if their bids were made in non‐wave periods. However, bidders who announced their takeover bids during wave periods exhibit significant underperformance. For mergers that took place within waves, there is no difference in bid premiums nor is there a difference in the long‐run returns of bidders involved during the first half and second half of the waves. We find that none of prominent theories of merger waves (managerial, misvaluation, and neoclassical) can fully account for Australian takeover waves and their effects. Instead, our results suggest that Banal‐Estanol et al.'s screening theory of merger activity, by combining the misvaluation and neoclassical theories, may provide a better explanation.     

Horizontal Mergers and Successive Oligopoly

This paper considers a successive oligopoly setting in which a set of upstream firms sell output non-exclusively to a group of downstream firms using a linear tariff. If the concavity of retail demand is constant then the profitability of horizontal merger at either the upstream or the downstream stage is shown to depend on the number of firms in the stage experiencing the merger and not on the number of firms in the other stage. Furthermore, the profitability of merger at either stage is the same as the profitability of merger amongst a set of vertically integrated firms in a setting in which all firms are vertically integrated. Finally, mergers at either stage are shown to reduce the sum of producer and consumer surplus. Moreover the negative effects of merger on surplus are unambiguously increased by increases in concentration in the merging stage and ambiguously affected by increases in concentration in the non-merging stage.JEL classification: L10, L20, L40     

The Empirical Basis for Antitrust: Cartels,Mergers, and Remedies

There have been a number of studies attempting to quantify the impact of cartels and mergers on prices. The state of the art of empirical analysis related to antitrust is best illustrated by the research of John Connor and John Kwoka. Connor summarizes the existing empirical research that estimates the magnitude of the impact of cartels on prices. He estimates that cartels increase prices by >20% on average, and concludes that fines and damage awards do not sufficiently deter cartels and should be larger. Kwoka summarizes research estimating the impact of mergers on prices and other market outcomes, and recommends tighter merger regulation. Since the works of both have been used to support more aggressive antitrust enforcement, it is important to understand the basis for their research and how it is best weighed. This article critiques their substantial efforts to add more empirical content as the basis for antitrust policies.     

Do cross-border acquisitions create value? Evidence from overseas acquisitions by Chinese firms

Based on the dynamic capability and organizational learning perspectives, we examine whether acquirers from emerging economies can create value for their shareholders in cross-border mergers and acquisitions, and the key drivers which may influence any such value creation. A sample of 367 cross-border mergers and acquisitions between 2000 and 2011 involving Chinese listed companies as the acquirers was analyzed to highlight the relationship between the cultural distance involved and the acquirers’ market valuation. On average, such cross-border transactions created value for the acquirer's shareholders, but cultural distance was negatively related to the extent of such value creation. Larger firms, more experienced firms, and acquisitions within the same industry were found to be less affected by cultural distance, emphasizing the importance of learning and absorptive capability, but employing a financial advisor did not seem to help. Thus firms with greater absorptive capacity were found better able to overcome the difficulties caused by cultural differences. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Evidence on real gains in corporate acquisitions

This study examines the change in operating performance of firms which merge for a sample of 324 combinations which occurred between 1967 and 1987. The results indicate that the performance of the merged firms typically improved following their combination. The results are not sensitive to factors such as offer size, industry relatedness between the bidder's and the target's businesses or bidder leverage. Separately, a positive association was found between the abnormal revaluation of the firms involved around the merger and the changes in operating performance observed. We conclude that the results documented in Healy et al. (1992) for a sample of 50 large mergers which occurred during the period 1979 through mid-1984 are not sensitive to sample size or to the period they investigated. The conclusions presented provide additional support for the idea that takeovers are motivated by expectations of improved performance due to the realization of synergistic benefits.