Corporate Restructuring and Bondholder Wealth

This paper provides an overview of existing research on how corporate restructuring affects bondholder wealth. Restructuring is defined as any transaction which affects the firm's riskiness by changing its underlying capital structure. Thus, it reaches well beyond asset restructuring and includes transactions such as leveraged buyouts, security issues and exchanges, and the issuance of stock options. We identify significant gaps in the literature, emphasize the potential differences in bond performance between market‐ and stakeholder‐oriented corporate governance systems, and provide valuable insights into methodological advances. We find that many issues remain as the empirical evidence is often inconclusive and focuses almost exclusively on the US. Research on other countries remains constrained by the lesser development of their bond markets, but is equally imperative because the position and bargaining power of creditors vis‐à‐vis the firm differ substantially across countries and governance regimes.     

Valuation Effects of Short Sale Constraints: the Case of Corporate Takeovers

We examine the relation between the degree of short sale constraints for acquiring firms' equity and post takeover stock performance. We find that negative long‐run abnormal returns appear to decline (in economic and statistical terms) as the extent and persistence of institutional block‐holder ownership increase, after accounting for the size, book‐to‐market and method of payment effects. In the spirit of Miller (1977) , such evidence implies that the degree of short sale constraints serves as an important determinant of acquiring firms' short‐run overpricing. It appears that the presence of concentrated institutional presence mitigates and in most cases eliminates, through effective arbitrage, any short‐run overpricing that may be responsible for the long‐run underperformance of acquirers, preserving in this way efficiency in the takeover markets.     

The Risk Effects of Acquiring Distressed Firms

Existing research shows that bidder default risk increases following acquisitions due to a rise in post‐acquisition leverage and managerial risk‐taking actions offsetting the potential for asset diversification. This study examines whether the risk effects of acquiring distressed targets are fundamentally different and investigates possible explanations for any dissimilarities. Bidders often acquire relatively smaller distressed targets in domestic and related industries and have a higher initial target stake and more financial flexibility, thereby minimizing risk exposure. Controlling for several characteristics of bidder investment behaviour in both types of deals, however, we find that the increase in bidder default risk is substantially larger when acquiring distressed 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.     

The Impact of Country Diversification on Wealth Effects in Cross-Border Mergers

We posit that country diversification via cross‐border mergers creates wealth by providing benefits for firms that are not available to their shareholders. We hypothesize that these benefits are inversely related to the extent of co‐movement in the economies of the bidder's and target's countries. We examine the wealth effects of U.S. targets and bidders involved in cross‐border mergers with firms in other countries during 1982–1991. We show that wealth effects vary, depending on country affiliations of two merging firms, and are inversely related to the degree of economic co‐movement between the two countries.     

Do Firms Use M&A Business to Pay for Analyst Coverage?

We find that acquirers in merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions are more likely to hire as advisors investment banks that provided analyst coverage for the acquirer prior to the transaction. We also find that compared to a matched control group of banks, the advisor banks are less likely to terminate and more likely to initiate analyst coverage of the acquirer after the transaction. Finally, the advisor banks that initiate coverage after the transaction collect higher fees. These findings suggest that firms value analyst coverage and use M&A advisor appointments and advisor fees to compensate for it.     

Equity‐Based Incentives,Risk Aversion,and Merger‐Related Risk‐Taking Behavior

We find that post‐merger equity risk is negatively related to the sensitivity of CEO wealth to stock return volatility (vega), but is concentrated in CEOs with high proportions of options and options that are more in‐the‐money. The probability of industrial diversification also increases in vega. Additional tests show that the decline in post‐merger equity risk results in a significant decrease in shareholder wealth. This decrease is concentrated among firms with CEOs having the highest delta and the highest delta and vega. Our results suggest that the increased convexity provided by option‐based compensation does not necessarily increase risk‐taking behavior by CEOs.     

The 'Independence' of Expert Opinions in Corporate Takeovers: Agreeing With Directors' Recommendations

Abstract:   The impact of non‐audit services on auditor independence has been the recent focus of regulators worldwide. Using expert reports provided in Australian takeovers, this study investigates a context where the audit independence issue is reversed. As approximately a quarter of expert reports are prepared by the target firm's auditor, concerns have been expressed over the independence of the opinion provided. This paper finds that, relative to other experts, there is no difference in the rate at which experts with other business dealings with the target, including the target's auditor, provide an opinion that agrees with that of directors. However, the capital market reaction around the release of the report indicates that reports produced by auditors are viewed as non‐independent.     

The effect of director experience on acquisition performance

Prior research finds that firms hire directors for their acquisition experience, regardless of acquisition quality (whether their prior acquisitions earned positive or negative announcement returns). Using several short- and long-run measures, we examine the effects of directors’ acquisition experience on the acquisition performance of firms hiring them. We find that board acquisition experience is positively related to subsequent acquisition performance, demonstrating that firms appropriately value experience. Beyond experience itself, however, the quality of directors’ prior acquisitions is also important. Our results suggest that firms may be better served to select directors based upon both past acquisition experience and acquisition performance.     

The two sides of CEO option grants at the IPO

This paper examines the impact of CEO IPO option grants on IPO underpricing. Contrary to Lowry and Murphy (2007) who do not find a relationship between the two, this paper finds such a relationship when board independence, the power of the CEO and venture capitalists (VCs) are taken into account. The results are threefold. First, powerful CEOs are able to reap substantial gains from IPO options, to the detriment of the shareholders. Second, young, powerful VCs use IPO option grants to bribe the CEO to agree to an early IPO which will leave more of the existing shareholders' money on the table. Finally, IPO options only work as a value-enhancing incentive in the presence of strong boards.     

50+ Years of Diversification Announcements

This paper studies announcement returns from 4,764 mergers over 57 years to shed light on several controversies concerning corporate diversification. One prominent view is that diversification destroys value because of agency problems or internal investment distortions, but we find that combined (acquirer plus target) announcement returns are significantly positive for diversifying mergers throughout the period, and no lower than the returns for related mergers. The returns from diversifying acquisitions fell after 1980, and investors rewarded mergers involving financially constrained firms before but not after 1980, consistent with the idea that the value of internal capital markets declined over time.     

The Industry Effects Regarding the Probability of Takeovers

This study attempts to determine whether an acquisition announcement signals potential gains to the corresponding industry rivals of the target, and whether these gains can be explained by industry-specific and rival firm-specific factors that reflect the likelihood of a takeover. The research finds that the valuation effects of the target, combined acquirer and target, and industry rivals of the target are positive and significant. The mean valuation effects per corresponding industry are significantly related to industry-specific characteristics that reflect the probability of a takeover. Specifically, industries characterized as having a higher level of free cash flow, a higher level of tangible assets, and a smaller market value experience a more favorable revaluation. A supplemental analysis of the individual rival firms is also conducted, since the variation in the valuation effects between rival firms within each of the industries is distinctly different from the variation of mean industry effect across industries. The analysis of the individual rivals finds that the same rival-specific variables are significant and in the same direction as the analysis of the industry-specific variables. In addition, the valuation effects of individual rivals are also inversely related to their previous performance. Overall, the results suggest that industry-specific and rival firm-specific characteristics that reflect a higher probability of a takeover are important in explaining acquisition gains and motivation.     

The power of the pen and executive compensation

We examine the press’ role in monitoring and influencing executive compensation practice using more than 11,000 press articles about CEO compensation from 1994 to 2002. Negative press coverage is more strongly related to excess annual pay than to raw annual pay, suggesting a sophisticated approach by the media in selecting CEOs to cover. However, negative coverage is also greater for CEOs with more option exercises, suggesting the press engages in some degree of “sensationalism.” We find little evidence that firms respond to negative press coverage by decreasing excess CEO compensation or increasing CEO turnover.     

Industry Expertise,Information Leakage and the Choice of M&A Advisors

This paper examines the impacts of M&A advisors’ industry expertise on firms’ choice of advisors in mergers and acquisitions. We show that an investment bank's expertise in merger parties’ industries increases its likelihood of being chosen as an advisor, especially when the acquisition is more complex, and when a firm in M&A has less information about the merger counterparty. However, due to the concerns about information leakage to industry rivals through M&A advisors, acquirers are reluctant to share advisors with rival firms in the same industry, and they are more likely to switch to new advisors if their former advisors have advisory relationship with their industry rivals. In addition, we document that advisors with more industry expertise earn higher advisory fees and increase the likelihood of deal completion.     

Post‐Merger Performance of Bank Holding Companies, 1987–1998

This paper examines the results of material mergers between bank holding companies (BHCs). Merged BHCs experience post‐merger profitability below the industry average. The market reaction to the merger announcements is significantly negative. The most important causes of the poor post‐merger performance are credit quality and the inadequate generation of fee income. Asset mix and capitalization also play a major part. The controllability of these items demonstrates the management challenge associated with a material merger.     

Target Company Cross‐border Effects in Acquisitions into the UK

We analyse the abnormal returns to target shareholders in cross‐border and domestic acquisitions of UK companies. The cross‐border effect during the bid month is small (0.84%), although cross‐border targets gain significantly more than domestic targets during the months surrounding the bid. We find no evidence for the level of abnormal returns in cross‐border acquisitions to be associated with market access or exchange rate effects, and only limited support for an international diversification effect. However, the cross‐border effect appears to be associated with significant payment effects, and there is no significant residual cross‐border effect once various bid characteristics are controlled for.     

ST公司并购现金支付方式决定因素研究——基于并购方与目标方双视角

采用 Logistic 模型,基于 ST 公司分别作为并购方和目标方双视角,考量中国资本市场并购活动中决定支付方式的市场因素、公司因素和交易因素。结果表明,市场因素中商业周期指标越积极,并购双方越愿意选择非现金支付;市场利率越高,越倾向于以现金支付。ST 公司为并购方时支付方式选择受到管理者控制权、分析师数量和交易态度等因素的决定;ST 公司为目标方时支付方式选择受到公司财务杠杆、公司成长机会、分析师数量和交易态度等因素支配。不同的并购支付方式会对并购后企业产生不同的效应。     

The role of investment banker directors in M&A

We examine how directors with investment banking experience affect firms? acquisition behavior. We find that firms with investment bankers on the board have a higher probability of making acquisitions. Furthermore, acquirers with investment banker directors experience higher announcement returns, pay lower takeover premiums and advisory fees, and exhibit superior long-run performance. Overall, our results suggest that directors with investment banking experience help firms make better acquisitions, both by identifying suitable targets and by reducing the cost of the deals.     

The Relation Among Targets' R&D Activities, Acquirers' Returns, and In-Process R&D in the US

Abstract:  Using a sample of 129 mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in the US between publicly traded acquirers and targets in research and development (R&D) intensive industries over the period of 1994-2004 and a size- and industry-matched sample, we examine the relation among targets' R&D activities, the probability of acquirers' writing-off in-process R&D (IPRD), and acquirers' returns around the time of M&A announcements. We find that firms acquiring targets with higher R&D investments tend to write off some of the acquired R&D assets upon the completion of the M&As. We also find that the median cumulative abnormal return during the three days around M&A announcements for acquirers with subsequent IPRD write-offs is −2.73% while the return for acquirers without IPRD write-offs is −0.60%. This suggests that acquirers' stock returns around M&A announcements are much lower when investors expect acquirers to expense IPRD. The results are consistent with our conjecture that acquirers tend to write-off IPRD when they acquire overvalued targets. We also find that IPRD write-offs do not increase earnings or stock returns of acquirers after M&As, which is inconsistent with an earnings management hypothesis.     

Why do corporate managers misstate financial statements? The role of option compensation and other factors

We investigate the incentives that led to the rash of restated financial statements at the end of the 1990s market bubble. We find that the likelihood of a misstated financial statement increases greatly when the CEO has very sizable holdings of in-the-money stock options. Misstatements are also more likely for firms that are constrained by an interest-coverage debt covenant, that raise new debt or equity capital, or that have a CEO who serves as board chair. Our results indicate that agency costs increased [Jensen, M.C., 2005a, Agency costs of overvalued equity. Financial Management 34, 5–19] as substantially overvalued equity caused managers to take actions to support the stock price.