The Market for Corporate Control and the Agency Paradigm

The paper analyzes the role of agency driven takeover activity.The analysis shows that takeovers can play an important rolein reducing agency costs even though the gains from the corporaterestructuring that follows the takeovers are zero, which countersexisting models of agency driven takeover activity. The modelcan therefore form the basis for deriving empirical predictionswhich discriminate between the "agency paradigm" and the "corporaterestructuring paradigm" of takeover activity. Negative post-mergerperformance (Agrawal et al., 1992), which is inconsistent withcorporate restructuring is consistent with this model, and thattakeover target's investment levels are below or at the average(Servaes 1994), which is inconsistent with the free cash flowtheory is also consistent with this model. JEL numbers: G14,G31, G32, G34.     

Agency, Bid Resistance and the Market for Corporate Control

In this paper we investigate the effects of post-bid defence activity for a sample of takeover bids in the UK. We find that most of the defences investigated promote the interests of target managers by significantly lowering the probability of bid success. We also find that most of the defences promote the interests of shareholders by increasing wealth gains by an amount that varies between 9% and 14%. These results suggest that bid resistance is to the mutual benefit of the managers and shareholders of target firms. This conclusion is in line with recent developments in agency theory.     

The Performance of the European Market for Corporate Control: Evidence from the Fifth Takeover Wave

This paper presents an in‐depth analysis of the performance of large, medium‐sized, and small corporate takeovers involving Continental European and UK firms during the fifth takeover wave. We find that takeovers are expected to create takeover synergies as their announcements trigger statistically significant abnormal returns of 9.13% for the target and of 0.53% for bidding firms. The characteristics of the target and bidding firms and of the bid itself are able to explain a significant part of these returns: (i) deal hostility increases the target's but decreases bidder's returns; (ii) the private status of the target is associated with higher bidder's returns; and (iii) an equity payment leads to a decrease in both bidder's and target's returns. The takeover wealth effect is however not limited to the bid announcement day but is also visible prior and subsequent to the bid. The analysis of pre‐announcement returns reveals that hostile takeovers are largely anticipated and associated with a significant increase in the bidder's and target's share prices. Bidders that accumulate a toehold stake in the target experience higher post‐announcement returns. A comparison of the UK and Continental European M&A markets reveals that: (i) the takeover returns of UK targets substantially exceed those of Continental European firms. (ii) The presence of a large shareholder in the bidding firm has a significantly positive effect on takeover returns in the UK and a negative one in Continental Europe. (iii) Weak investor protection and low disclosure in Continental Europe allow bidding firms to adopt takeover strategies enabling them to act opportunistically towards the target's incumbent shareholders.     

Impact of Shareholder Proposals on the Functioning of the Market for Corporate Control

Firms receiving shareholder proposals are 16% more likely to become a target of acquisition. Such companies earn approximately 7.2% lower acquisition returns compared to gains for targets with no proposals. Higher acquisition likelihood and lower target returns are primarily associated with proposals drawing a larger proportion of favorable votes, larger voter turnout, as well as with proposals submitted shortly before takeover announcements, and motivated by the removal of antitakeover provisions. Our findings suggest that shareholder proposals can assist bidders in the identification of targets or signal the willingness of target shareholders to accept bids with lower premiums.     

Mergers and acquisitions research in finance and accounting: Past,present, and future

This study presents an analysis of publication patterns and major themes in research on mergers and acquisitions in finance and accounting. We find that takeovers as mechanisms of governance, drivers of mergers, mechanisms of mergers, bank mergers, cross-border mergers, shareholder wealth effects of mergers and related events, and the role of financial experts and ownership structure form major themes of research in the finance area, while in accounting area major themes are corporate governance and accounting outcomes, predicting takeovers and their outcomes, valuation, financial reporting and takeover decisions, and financial reporting and performance.     

Mergers and Acquisitions in Latin America: Industrial Productivity and Corporate Governance

This article examines the impact of industrial productivity in the country of origin on transnationals M&As, directed from OECD countries toward Latin America in the period 1996–2010. It also analyzes the relationship between external mechanisms of corporate governance and transnational M&As. Employing a gravitational model at the industry level, we find that industry productivity in the country of origin promotes transnational M&A activity, although capital productivity affects it negatively. We also find evidence that higher standards of corporate governance in both origin and destination countries increase the likelihood of transnational M&As taking place.     

Increasing Market Share as a Rationale for Corporate Acquisitions

This study examines the relative importance of market share in acquisitions because anecdotal evidence and economic theory suggest that merging firms benefit from larger market share. Firms might focus on market share to improve shareholder value through improved efficiency, which benefits consumers. Alternatively, higher market share could generate greater market power, which adversely affects consumers. I find that market share of merging firms increases by more than 30%, relative to the pre‐acquisition level, and the increase is even larger after I account for industry changes. Abnormal returns are positively correlated with changes in market share around acquisitions, but not with changes in industry concentration, which suggests stock market's expectation of future benefits from efficiency rather than market power. More directly, I find that merging firms' long‐run profitability increases with market share, and the increase in profitability primarily results from better asset management.     

Shareholder Wealth Effects of European Domestic and Cross‐border Takeover Bids

This paper analyses the short‐term wealth effects of large intra‐European takeover bids. We find announcement effects of 9% for the target firms compared to a statistically significant announcement effect of only 0.7% for the bidders. The type of takeover bid has a large impact on the short‐term wealth effects with hostile takeovers triggering substantially larger price reactions than friendly operations. When a UK firm is involved, the abnormal returns are higher than those of bids involving both a Continental European target and bidder. There is strong evidence that the means of payment in an offer has an impact on the share price. A high market‐to‐book ratio of the target leads to a higher bid premium, but triggers a negative price reaction for the bidding firm. We also investigate whether the predominant reason for takeovers is synergies, agency problems or managerial hubris. Our results suggest that synergies are the prime motivation for bids and that targets and bidders share the wealth gains.     

Incentive Effects, Monitoring Mechanisms and the Market for Corporate Control: An Analysis of the Factors Affecting Public to Private Transactions in the UK

Abstract:   This paper investigates the factors that influence the decision to change the status of a publicly quoted company to that of a private company. We find that firms that go private are more likely to have higher CEO ownership and higher institutional ownership. In relation to their board structures, firms going private tend to have more duality but there is no statistical difference in the proportion of non‐executive directors. They do not show signs of having excess free cash flows but there is some evidence of lower growth opportunities. We do not find that firms going private experience a greater threat of hostile acquisition. The results are therefore consistent with incentive and monitoring explanations of going private. Calculation of the probability of going private shows that incentive effects are stronger than the monitoring effects.     

The Effect of Cross-Border Acquisitions on Shareholder Wealth — Evidence from Switzerland

We analyze the wealth effects of 114 domestic and international acquisitions announced by Swiss corporations between 1990 and 2001. We find no difference between national and cross-border mergers. This may indicate that the international capital markets are highly integrated and is in contrast to recent empirical findings on a prevailing segmentation of capital markets within Europe. We also analyze the role of professional advisors in Swiss M&A transactions. Our results indicate that the expenses for professional advice might outweigh the potential benefits.     

Separation of Ownership from Control and Acquiring Firm Performance: The Case of Family Ownership in Canada

Abstract:   This study investigates the relationship between ownership structure and acquiring firm performance. A large proportion of Canadian public companies have controlling shareholders (families) that often exercise control over voting rights while holding a small fraction of the cash flow rights. This is achieved through the concurrent use of dual class voting shares and stock pyramids. Many suggest that these ownership structures involve larger agency costs than those imposed by dispersed ownership structures and that they distort corporate decisions with respect to investment choices such as acquisitions. We find that average acquiring firm announcement period abnormal returns for our sample of 327 Canadian transactions are positive over the 1998–2002 period. Cash deals, acquisitions of unlisted targets and cross‐border deals have a positive impact on value creation. Governance mechanisms (outside block‐holders, unrelated directors and small board size) also have a positive influence on the acquiring firm performance. Further, the positive abnormal returns are greater for family firms. We do not find that separation of ownership and control has a negative impact on performance. These results suggest that, contrary to other jurisdictions offering poor minority shareholder protection or poor corporate governance, separation of control and ownership is not viewed as leading to value destroying mergers and acquisitions, i.e., market participants do not perceive families as using M&A to obtain private benefits at the expense of minority shareholders. We do find a non‐monotonic relationship between ownership level and acquiring firm abnormal returns. Ownership of a majority of the cash flow rights has a negative impact on announcement returns. This is consistent with the view that large shareholders may undertake less risky projects as their wealth invested in the firm increases.     

Stock Market Valuation, Profitability and R&D Spending of the Firm: The Effect of Technology Mergers and Acquisitions

Abstract:  In this paper, we investigate whether a firm can enhance the effect of its R&D spending on its current market value and future profitability through technology-oriented M&As. On the basis of an analysis of 1,879 M&As, we find that when a technology firm acquires another technology firm, the magnitude of the stock price response to the R&D spending of an acquirer increases by 107% in the year of the M&A. In contrast, we find no such increase in the stock price response to the R&D spending of a non-technology acquirer. We also find that technology acquirers are more successful in converting their R&D spending into positive future profitability than non-technology acquirers. Our results are robust for different alternative specifications of our model and when various firm differences are controlled for.     

Multiple Bids, Management Opposition, and the Market for Corporate Control

We use regression analysis to disentangle the wealth effect for acquired firm shareholders of management opposition and multiple bids (e.g., multiple bidders and bid revisions). Although multiple bidders and bid revisions occur more frequently for opposed acquisitions, opposition is not associated with incremental acquisition returns for acquisitions with multiple bidders. We also find that management opposition has no significant incremental effect on single bidder acquisitions unless the acquiring firm revises its initial bid. These findings indicate that rather than amplifying acqiuisition returns directly, management opposition instead serves as a negotiating tool to solicit additional bids.     

控制权机制对公司治理的影响研究

公司控制权是公司治理中的核心问题。近几年，国内关于公司治理的实证研究文献越来越多，但是讨论公司控制权与公司治理之间关系的实证研究文献却并不多，这是我国公司治理研究领域比较薄弱的一个环节。本文从我国证券市场的实际情况出发，以公司控制权机制对公司治理的影响为研究主题，通过实证分析，讨论了公司控制权机制对公司治理绩效的影响，并提出了一些建议。     

Disclosure Regulation and Corporate Acquisitions

This paper examines the effect of disclosure regulation on the takeover market. We study the implementation of a recent European regulation that imposes tighter disclosure requirements regarding the financial and ownership information on public firms. We find a substantial drop in the number of control acquisitions after the implementation of the regulation, a decrease that is concentrated in countries with more dynamic takeover markets. Consistent with the idea that the disclosure requirements increased acquisition costs, we also observe that, under the new disclosure regime, target (acquirer) stock returns around the acquisition announcement are higher (lower), and toeholds are substantially smaller. Overall, our evidence suggests that tighter disclosure requirements can impose significant acquisition costs on bidders and thus slow down takeover activity.     

Bond market access and acquisitions: empirical evidence from the European market

We investigate whether access to bond markets affects acquisition activity of the European firms between 1999 and 2014. Our study provides insight into the effect that the growing European bond market has on corporate investment activity. We find that access to the bond markets, measured by the existence of a credit rating, has a significant effect on the tendency of firms to make acquisitions. The effect is strongest in Continental Europe and during times of high acquisition activity. We further find that consistent with prior U.S. evidence, bond market access has an inverse effect on abnormal returns generated by the acquisitions. That finding suggests that firms with superior access to financing pursue targets of lesser quality.     

上市公司并购重组支付方式体系存在的问题及对策

上市公司并购重组在促进产业结构调整、优化社会资源配置方面发挥了日益重要的作用,而丰富、灵活的并购重组支付方式是提高并购市场效率的关键之一。本文简要介绍了国内上市公司并购重组支付体系概况,重点分析存在的问题,并结合国内外并购市场案例及实证数据,对并购创新支付工具作了评述,提出完善上市公司并购重组支付体系的政策建议,包括在并购交易中先行推出定向可转债、引入储架发行制度、论证认股权证试点的可行性、支持券商提供并购支付融资工具等。     

The Impact of the Corporate Control Market on IPO Decisions

Entrepreneurs who take their firm public during an active corporate control market face an increased risk of losing control through a takeover. I examine the extent to which the threat of takeover impacts IPO firms’ decisions and find that an active takeover market in an IPO firm's industry increases the probability that the firm incorporates in a state with state‐level antitakeover provisions. IPO firms backed by venture capital investors and reputable underwriters are less likely to incorporate in a state offering antitakeover provisions. A closer examination of equity carve‐outs suggests that control is not a first‐order consideration for some IPO firms.     

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.