The theory of corporate takeover bids: A subgame perfect approach

In this paper I re-examine Grossman & Hart's (1980a) earlier work on corporate takeovers and address three main shortcomings of their theory. First, their theory implies that in the ‘Nash equilibrium’ either all shareholders will decide to tender their shares or all will refuse the raider's tender offer. Hence, they look only at the pure strategy equilibria. Second, there does not exist any free-rider problem in the extreme cases of pure strategy equilbria because everyone sells his or her share and the raider does not have to deal with any minority shareholder in the equilibrium. On the other hand, if the raid fails and no one sells, then there is no question of dilution either. I show some mixed-strategy equilibria using assumptions of Grossman and Hart. Third, Grossman and Hart claim that their theory rules out the possibilities of takeovers by the inefficient raider in which the shareholders who tender their shares are worse off than they would have been otherwise with the incumbent management. It appears from the model that their argument is based on rather arbitrary assumptions.