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firms are more likely to acquire with stock, and acquirers are more overvalued in successful stock mergers than in withdrawn mergers.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.     

Cross-border mergers and acquisitions and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Chinese listed firms

This study examines the impact of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) on acquirers’ corporate social responsibility (CSR). Based on a sample of Chinese listed firms, we find that firms with cross-border M&A activities experience an improvement in subsequent CSR performance. Specifically, the CSR rating is approximately 8.24% higher in firms with cross-border M&As than in those without such activities. We also find that this positive influence is more pronounced in firms with low initial CSR ratings than in those with high initial CSR ratings at the time when a cross-border M&A deal is completed. Additional analyses reveal that this positive effect is mainly driven by the target firms from countries with high social preference relative to China and that the enhancement in CSR driven by cross-border M&As translates into higher operating performance and easier access to finance. Overall, our findings demonstrate that cross-border M&As can serve as a critical channel for acquirers from a country with low institutional quality to build a better reputation through environmentally friendly behaviour and socially responsible engagement, and therefore gain capital market benefits.     

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.     

The Relevance of Target Accounting Quality to the Long-Term Success of Cross-Border Mergers

Abstract:  We investigate a sample of cross-border mergers involving US firms that acquired foreign targets between 1985 and 1995. Our general interest is in the long-term success of the acquisitions, measured by the post-merger abnormal returns to the US acquirers. Our primary focus is the relationship between the quality of the foreign target's accounting disclosures and the acquisition's long-term success. Employing a procedure recommended by Lyon et al. (1999) , we find that US acquirers in cross-border mergers experience significantly negative long-term abnormal returns post-merger. These returns also are significantly more negative than those realized by a matched sample of US acquirers that acquired US targets. To investigate the potential association between the US acquirers' post-acquisition returns and target firms' accounting disclosures, we classify the merger transactions by target firm home country. We define variables to reflect the quality of accounting disclosures and control for other important country-specific features. The results reveal that post-merger abnormal returns are less negative for acquirers of targets based in countries where accounting data is less value relevant. This may be due to a higher cost of capital for target firms in these countries, resulting in a built-in discount in the pricing of targets. An examination of the premiums paid in a subset of 79 cross-border mergers reveals evidence consistent with this contention: premiums are lower for target firms based in countries where accounting data is less value relevant. These results suggest that shareholders of targets from such countries pay a price for their country's institutional framework that makes accounting information less value relevant.     

Does venture capital syndication affect mergers and acquisitions?

We find that venture capital (VC) syndicate-backed targets receive higher acquisition premiums and spend more time negotiating transaction terms. The acquirers of syndicate-backed targets receive lower cumulative abnormal returns surrounding the acquisition announcement, but they outperform the individual-backed targets in the long-term. We show that VC syndication creates value for entrepreneurial firms by leading to larger and more independent boards of directors prior to acquisition. It also leads to better incentive alignment between the CEO and the shareholders of the acquiring firm. In addition, syndicate-backed targets prefer stock as the method of payment in mergers and acquisitions. Collectively, we show that VC syndication creates value for both entrepreneurial firms and their acquirers in the long-term.     

Board connections and M&A transactions

We examine M&A transactions between firms with current board connections and find that acquirers obtain higher announcement returns in transactions with a first-degree connection where the acquirer and the target share a common director. Acquirer returns are also higher in transactions with a second-degree connection where one acquirer director and one target director serve on the same third board. Our results suggest that first-degree connections benefit acquirers with lower takeover premiums while second-degree connections benefit acquirers with greater value creation. Overall, we provide new evidence that board connectedness plays important roles in corporate investments and leads to greater value creation.     

The Announcement Effects of U.S. versus non‐U.S. Bank Mergers: Do They Differ?

Non‐U.S. bank mergers are becoming an increasingly important part of the worldwide economic landscape. Are the market reactions to non‐U.S. bank mergers similar to the reaction in the United States? I address this question by examining abnormal returns of publicly traded partners on the announcement of forty‐one non‐U.S. bank mergers and comparing the returns with a U.S. control group. I find acquirers in non‐U.S. domestic bank mergers earn more and non‐U.S. targets earn less than their U.S. counterparts. However, for the subset of mergers in countries with relatively well‐developed stock markets, I find that partners earn similar returns.     

Pre-deal differences in corporate social responsibility and acquisition performance

Drawing on the portability theory, we examine how the pre-deal gap in corporate social responsibility (CSR) between the bidder and target affects announcement returns in the international takeover market. We find that the higher the bidder's CSR scores relative to the target's, the higher is the synergy captured by combined cumulative abnormal returns of bidders and targets. It supports our hypothesis that synergistic gains are higher when the ex-ante bidder-target CSR gap is positive. The results also show that the synergy effect of CSR is not shared between bidder and target firms; thereby, bidders earn abnormal returns while targets lose. We further document that the acquirers with higher CSR practices before the acquisition are more likely to engage in related and non-cash-financed deals, and capital markets reward these acquisition choices. Finally, the results show that a positive CSR gap reduces the takeover premium and the time taken to complete the deal. Overall, the results suggest a positive valuation for the shareholders of the combined firm resulting from the portability of higher CSR practices from bidders to targets. Our results are subject to a battery of robustness tests, including alternative measures of combined returns and CSR, and tests for endogeneity.     

Investor protection and the value effects of bank merger announcements in Europe and the US

Investor protection regimes have been shown to partly explain why the same type of corporate event may attract different investor reactions across countries. We compare the value effects of large bank merger announcements in Europe and the US and find an inverse relationship between the level of investor protection prevalent in the target country and abnormal returns that bidders realize during the announcement period. Accordingly, bidding banks realize higher returns when targeting low protection economies (most European economies) than bidders targeting institutions which operate under a high investor protection regime (the US). We argue that bidding bank shareholders need to be compensated for an increased risk of expropriation by insiders which they face in a low protection environment where takeover markets are illiquid and there are high private benefits of control.     

The Long-Horizon Performance of REIT Mergers

We study long-horizon shareholder returns in a comprehensive sample of Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) mergers, to test whether or not the anomaly of post-merger underperformance observed in conventional firms applies to the case of REITs. Constructing synthetic benchmark portfolios controlling for firm size and for book-to-market value ratio, we find that 60-month buy-and-hold abnormal returns for REIT acquirers are significantly negative at approximately −10%, supporting the position that REIT merger acquirers underperform non-merging REITs in the long run. We find no evidence to challenge previous studies reporting positive announcement period returns for acquirers when the target is privately held, but we do find evidence that these positive returns do not persist. The long term performance of acquiring REITs is approximately the same whether the target is public or private.

Riding the merger wave: Uncertainty,reduced monitoring,and bad acquisitions

We show that acquisitions initiated during periods of high merger activity (“merger waves”) are accompanied by poorer quality of analysts' forecasts, greater uncertainty, and weaker CEO turnover-performance sensitivity. These conditions imply reduced monitoring and lower penalties for initiating inefficient mergers. Therefore, merger waves may foster agency-driven behavior, which, along with managerial herding, could lead to worse mergers. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find that the average long-term performance of acquisitions initiated during merger waves is significantly worse. We also find that corporate governance of in-wave acquirers is weaker, suggesting that agency problems may be present in merger wave acquisitions.     

Deal Size,Bid Premium,and Gains in Bank Mergers: The Impact of Managerial Motivations

Do mergers with greater target relative to acquirer size create more value than mergers with smaller relative sized targets? Do larger bid amounts represent wealth transfers from acquirers or do they signal greater expected merger gains? We hypothesize that the relations among aggregate merger gains, relative size, and bid premiums are asymmetric across mergers made by value‐enhancing versus value‐reducing managers. We use a large sample of bank mergers to test these predictions and find that the value response to different explanatory variables is asymmetric. Our findings provide new insights into how the market values merger bids.