Home  About us  Contact
 

Takeover Market (takeover + market)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting85%

Selected Abstracts

CLUSTERED SYNERGIES IN THE TAKEOVER MARKET

THE JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL RESEARCH, Issue 4 2008
Jeff Madura
Abstract In a competitive market for takeover bids, the takeover premium serves as an effective proxy for the expected synergy. We find that the expected synergy is primarily related to the premiums paid in other recent takeovers in the same industry. This relation is even stronger when considering previous takeovers (especially over the previous three-month horizon) in the same industry that have the same payment method (cash versus stock) or form of takeover (tender offer versus merger). More of the variation in expected synergies among takeovers can be explained by the premiums derived from recent takeovers in the same industry than by all bidder- and target-specific characteristics combined. We also find that the bidder valuation effects are inversely related to the premium paid for targets, implying that abnormally high premiums may reflect overpayment rather than abnormally high synergies. [source]

Investment Decisions and Managerial Discipline: Evidence from the Takeover Market

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, Issue 2 2005
Ralph Scholten
This article focuses on the relative importance of boards of directors and the hostile takeover market in disciplining managers who make poor acquisition decisions. The evidence shows a weak inverse relationship between acquisition performance and the likelihood of becoming a takeover target, but only after it becomes clear that the internal control mechanism has failed. A forced turnover of a top executive was more likely in the 1990s, the more negative the abnormal return associated with an acquisition announcement. The relationship between forced turnover and negative acquisition returns is stronger when hostile takeover activity is less intense. Hence, it appears that being disciplined for making a poor acquisition is a function more of the internal control mechanism than of the workings of the takeover market. [source]

The Takeover Directive: Is a Little Regulation Better Than No Regulation?

EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2009
Blanaid Clarke
This article examines Directive 2004/25/EC on Takeover Bids through a regulatory lens in order to determine its effectiveness as a regulatory mechanism. A central regulatory problem for European legislators is to determine the optimal balance between harmonisation and diversity, and the directive reflects the balance which was struck. The article questions whether the resulting ,light regulatory touch' may have jeopardised the existing efficient self-regulatory regime which operates in the UK (the largest European takeover market), while simultaneously undermining the directive's goal of facilitating takeovers and yielding a level playing field. [source]

Investment Decisions and Managerial Discipline: Evidence from the Takeover Market

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, Issue 2 2005
Ralph Scholten
This article focuses on the relative importance of boards of directors and the hostile takeover market in disciplining managers who make poor acquisition decisions. The evidence shows a weak inverse relationship between acquisition performance and the likelihood of becoming a takeover target, but only after it becomes clear that the internal control mechanism has failed. A forced turnover of a top executive was more likely in the 1990s, the more negative the abnormal return associated with an acquisition announcement. The relationship between forced turnover and negative acquisition returns is stronger when hostile takeover activity is less intense. Hence, it appears that being disciplined for making a poor acquisition is a function more of the internal control mechanism than of the workings of the takeover market. [source]

Do Acquirers Manage Earnings Prior to a Share for Share Bid?

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS FINANCE & ACCOUNTING, Issue 5-6 2008
Antonia Botsari
Abstract:, Earnings management by acquirers ahead of share for share bids may affect whether a bid succeeds, and hence which management team controls the target's assets, as well as the distribution of gains between target and acquirer shareholders. This paper tests for such earnings management for the UK, the world's second largest takeover market, in the period 1997,2001 when M&A reached record levels and share for share deals came to account for the majority of expenditure. Using a range of approaches originating in Jones' model, the paper finds evidence consistent with earnings management ahead of share-financed bids. [source]

Board Efficiency and Internal Corporate Control Mechanisms

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, Issue 4 2003
Clara Graziano
We analyze the interactions between internal and external control mechanisms in a framework in which the board selects the CEO and then decides whether to retain or dismiss him after observing a signal regarding his ability. The novel aspect of our paper is that we consider both the hiring and the firing of the CEO by the board. The type of board is defined by its ability to select a good CEO, so that the quality of the CEO depends on the type of board. Then, the dismissal-retention decision provides information not only on the quality of the CEO but also on the board's type. We show that the board's behavior depends on the pressure from the takeover market and on whether its type is publicly known. When the pressure from the takeover market is high and the type of board is private information, the board prefers not to dismiss the manager even if it has received a very low signal regarding his quality. Hence, our model endogenously derives a collusion between board and CEO in which the board does not fire a bad CEO. This behavior emerges as an attempt to hide the board's inability to accomplish the first task, CEO selection, by distorting the second task, the CEO retention-dismissal decision. [source]