Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine whether the acquirers of private targets outperform their peers that acquire public targets in the long run.

Using two samples of acquirers of private and public targets, this paper analyses their short-run market performance and long-run operating performance. Univariate analyses and multiple regressions are used to analyse abnormal stock returns and abnormal cash flow performances of bidders.

Acquirers of private targets earn significantly higher abnormal return than acquirers of public targets during the announcement period. Similarly, the long-run operating performance of acquirers of private targets is significantly higher than that of the acquirers of public targets. However, the performance difference between two groups is more pronounced when cash flows are scaled by the market value of acquirers.

This is the first Australian study to examine whether the long-run operating performance of acquirers depends on the organisational form of the target acquired.

We empirically investigate the hypothesis that the less transparent (more difficult to value) the target’s assets are the more likely it is that the acquiring firm can obtain higher short- and long-term returns. We analyze a sample of 1,538 friendly acquisitions partitioned in two separate dimensions: acquisitions of public versus private firms, and acquisitions of a firm’s assets versus acquisitions of a firm’s assets and its management. Using a sample of (nondiversifying) real estate transactions with a public REIT as the acquirer, we find that acquisitions of public firms have insignificant short-term abnormal returns. Acquisitions of private targets have positive and significant short-term abnormal returns. The acquirer’s abnormal returns are higher in both cases when the transactions involve acquisition of the target firm’s management. We find parallel results when analyzing the acquirer’s Q over the merger year and the three following years. Our conclusions are robust to the type of financing (cash, stock, or a combination) used in the acquisition.

This paper aims to evaluate the robustness of the listing effect in Australia, that is whether acquisitions of private firms create more value to the bidding firm’s shareholders than acquisitions of publicly listed firms.

The authors analyze the market reaction to the announcement of takeover bids initiated by Australian public firms on private and public targets over the period 1990-2011. The analysis controls for a wide range of bidder, deal and target country characteristics that are likely to correlate with the target’s listing status and acquirer abnormal returns. The authors also use a selection model to address the endogenous choice of the target’s listing status.

The results indicate that bidders experience significantly higher abnormal returns of about 1.7 per cent in the 11-day event window when the target is a private firm. The authors show that this result is broad-based and persistent. It does not appear to depend on whether the target is small or large; whether it is related or unrelated to the bidder’s industry; whether it is in the resources sector; and whether the transaction is domestic or cross-border. They find some evidence that bidder returns might be stronger for larger acquisitions, for unrelated targets, and in poor market conditions such as in the wake of the recent global financial crisis.

The research would benefit from the inclusion of the bidding firm’s ownership and governance characteristics.

The results support the view that market frictions contribute to make private firms attractive targets.

The analysis confirms the pervasiveness of the listing effect in a market characterized by a lesser degree of competition, higher search costs and the significance of the natural resources sector.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the long‐term post‐acquisition share performance of Malaysian acquiring firms over the period 2000‐2004.

The authors use the event‐type methodology to analyse acquirer returns in relation to target status, method of payment and other firm characteristics, using both univariate and multivariate analyses. In total three performance measures are used to identify the long‐term share performance of acquiring firms: cumulative market‐adjusted abnormal returns, the buy‐and‐hold market‐adjusted and buy‐and‐hold matched‐sample abnormal returns.

The results show the existence of negative abnormal returns to acquirers over two‐ and three‐year periods after acquisition. The study also finds that acquirers of private targets earn negative returns, while acquirers of public targets earn insignificant returns. It is also found that under‐performance is limited to the small size acquirers and to large relative‐size acquisitions. Furthermore, the results indicate that acquirer's long‐term performance is not related to the method of payment and book‐to‐market ratio of the acquirer.

The Malaysian stock market is relatively small compared to the US and UK markets where most previous research has been carried out. The current study allows us to assess the robustness of the models and whether the findings in developed markets may be generalized to the smaller developing markets. This paper contributes to the present body of knowledge by offering evidence of acquirer's post‐acquisition performance from a developing market.

The volume of acquisitions involving privately held targets has far surpassed that of publicly traded firms in recent years; yet, surprisingly little research has examined private target acquisitions. By analyzing the unique features of the market for private targets, we compare the potential for value creation and value capture in private and public target acquisitions. We argue that the corporate context of private targets does not provide the same opportunities for curbing agency costs and sharing intangible resources than the context of public targets, which reduces the value creation potential for the buyer. On the other hand, private targets have lower bargaining power vis-à-vis acquirers because of higher failures in the market for corporate control of private firms and liquidity discount, which increases the value creation potential for the buyer. The net value creation potential of acquiring private targets, therefore, depends on the relative importance of their agency costs, resource sharing opportunities, and bargaining power.

The purpose of this paper is to test whether bank mergers are driven by equity overvaluation and management compensation incentives.

To test whether equity mispricing drive bank mergers, the authors employ two alternative price-to-residual income valuation (P/V) measures for bidders and targets while the authors control for their growth prospects with the price-to-book (P/B) (two years before) ratio. The intrinsic value (V) is estimated using the three-period forecast horizon residual income model of Ohlson (1995) and perpetual residual income model that does not rely on analysts’ forecasts of future earnings prospects. The latter measure allows the authors to estimate V for a much larger sample of banks. The empirical analysis is supplemented with a standard event analysis and assessment of the long-term performance of bank mergers subsequent to the announcement date.

The evidence shows that bidders are overvalued relative to their targets, especially in equity offer deals. The authors also find that highly valued bidders: are more likely to use stock than cash; are willing to pay more relative to the target market price; are more likely to acquire private than public targets; earn lower announcement-period returns; fail to create synergy gains; experience long-term underperformance; and reward their top managers of with large compensation increases subsequent to mergers.

This study provides results consistent with the view that behavioral and managerial incentives play an important role in motivating bank mergers.

Motivated by the findings of Bhabra and Hossain (2017) that highlight an improvement in US market performance in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) period, this paper aims to investigate how this change varies with the methods of payment used for the deals.

Deductive in nature and using an event study approach, this paper uses a sample of 675 deals between 1999 and 2006 to test three research hypotheses in a pre-post setting.

Results show that at the aggregate level, there is a significant improvement in the market performance of US acquirers around the announcement day in the aftermath of the passage of SOX 2002. Considered separately, both US stock acquirers and cash acquirers did not experience any significant improvement in market performance in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley period. These results are robust to controlling for governance, firm and deal variables, as well as industry and year fixed effects.

Exploratory in nature, the results are to be interpreted in light of the sample size and the period under investigation.

The results provide evidence for regulators and legislators on the contribution of SOX 2002 to curbing managerial misconduct. Significant improvement in the market performance also signals more confidence in managerial decisions and a reduction in agency problems. The insignificant change in stock acquirers’ market performance can be an indication that policymakers should exert more efforts to improve shareholders' confidence in the quality of disclosure.

This investigation provides unique insights on whether SOX has been effective in mitigating mispricing concerns associated with stock-financed acquisitions and whether it was effective in moderating the governance mechanism associated with cash-financed acquisitions.

The international market entry strategy by acquisition is one of the critical options for success in international business. The decision to acquire a local firm is expected to impact the post-entry financial performance of the local firm as the acquirers come with proprietary advantages to improve the overall performance of the acquired company. The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the post-acquisition financial performance of acquired foreign subsidiaries and comparable unacquired local firms in Ghana to determine the effect of foreign acquisition on the financial performance of the local subsidiaries.

A quantitative approach was adopted in this study. A sample of 100 locally acquired and non-acquired firms were studied using purposive and convenience sampling method. The research adopted the propensity score matching and the differences in difference methodologies to determine the returns on assets (ROA) of non-acquired local firms and acquired foreign subsidiaries are compared one year pre-acquisition t₁ to two years post-acquisition t₂.

The results demonstrate a higher post-acquisition financial performance of locally acquired foreign subsidiaries in relation to their local counterparts in Ghana. Firms with pre-acquisition modernized ownership structures performed better than state-owned firms and firms with high pre-acquisition absorptive capacity outperformed firms with lower pre-acquisition absorptive capacity. The results also indicate that ROA for acquired local firms in the year of acquisition drops in relation to the year prior to acquisition

A major limitation of this research is that the relative capability of the parent companies and experience in the transfer of knowledge to the acquired local subsidiaries was not considered. The real impact of the various multinationals would have revealed how the capability and competencies of the different parent companies whose subsidiaries this study considered in the paper make a difference in their performance. The study did not also consider the value of parent company participation in the local management of the acquired subsidiaries. Whereas some acquired firms had parent company staff participating in the local management, others did not have same, thus challenging the performance results without any control of this variable. The other limitation of this research is the fact that it did not also consider the experience of the parent company as a factor that can influence the performance of the subsidiary. The more experienced the parent company is in engaging foreign markets, the more likely the support for the subsidiary will result in higher performance as parent company brings previous learnings. Another limitation of this study is that it measures the financials only (ROA) and hence does not provide a 360° assessment of the subsidiary performance, which includes the operational and overall subsidiary effectiveness. This research has not empirically examined all aspects of foreign acquisitions in Ghana and thus has many aspects for future exploration that other researchers may focus on. The paper has not considered the experience and capability of the parent company to transfer technology, innovation and all the advantages of multinationals to the post-acquisition performance of subsidiaries. More experienced multinationals are most likely to transfer knowledge faster to subsidiaries than less experienced ones, thus likely to show better performance post-acquisition than the less experienced ones. The effect of this phenomenon has not been considered in this study. Parent company participation in the local management of the subsidiary can also make a difference in the post-acquisition performance equation but this has not been considered in this research. Some parent companies actively participate in the local subsidiary management as management support for the subsidiary. This might have some effect on the subsidiary post-acquisition performance but this study does consider this. Other researchers may want to look into this factor. Future researchers may also assess the differences in performance of subsidiaries that are wholly owned and partial owned in Ghana. The performance of Greenfield joint ventures and local firm acquisitions can also be studied.

Findings of this research has implications for firms using acquisition as foreign market entry strategy to inform the choice of local partners to select for acquisitions as pre-acquisition ownership structure and absorptive capacity of local Ghanaian firms impact post-acquisitions performance. Ghanaian firms also seeking to attract foreign investments into their businesses will also find the results useful as they organize to meet prospective acquirers’ expectations, for example, building their human capacity and ownership structures, developing export and ensuring debt rations to attract potential acquirers.

Acquisitions as an international market entry strategy continue to gain grounds with lots of research in the area. However, there is scanty research on post-acquisition financial performance, especially in the developing country context, and this paper fills that yawning knowledge gap by comparing acquired and non-acquired local firms in Ghana to determine if foreign acquisitions lead to better ROA.

In M&A markets, acquirers face a hold-up problem of losing the value of investments they make in due diligence, negotiations, and post-acquisition planning if targets would pursue the options of waiting for better offers or selling to an alternative bidder. This chapter extends information economics to the literature on M&A contracting by arguing that such contracting problems are more likely to occur for targets with better outside options created by the information available on their resources and prospects. We also argue that acquirers address these contracting problems by using termination payment provisions to safeguard their investments. While previous research in corporate strategy and finance has suggested that certain factors can facilitate an acquisition by reducing a focal acquirer’s risk of adverse selection (e.g., signals, certifications), we note that these same factors can make the target attractive to other potential bidders and can exacerbate the risk of hold-up, thereby leading acquirers to use termination payment provisions as contractual safeguards.

While the existing studies largely suggest that valuation uncertainty benefits acquirers, who apply discounts to targets' value attributable to information asymmetry, the authors argue that the opposite may be the case.

Through multivariate econometric analysis of transaction data, the authors establish the link between the degree of valuation uncertainty measured by targets' track of public listing and acquisition premia. The authors use text-mining tools to measure acquirer–target similarity and control for its role in intermediating the posited empirical relationships.

Having analyzed 618 acquisitions involving listed targets from China, the authors find that acquirers pay higher valuation premia for the more recently listed and relatively younger companies than for those with a longer history since floatation. Similar patterns apply to valuation multiples. Higher valuations are partially attributable to premia for control, as acquirers are likelier to buy a majority stake in the recently listed firms, especially if the latter are similar to them. Such transactions take less time to complete and involve a transfer of larger share blocks despite the higher degree of information asymmetry and a frequent lack of targets' operational profitability. The authors also observe a significant premium for target–acquirer similarity: acquirers appear to rush deal completion due to possible overestimation of targets' potential and familiarity bias.

The authors show that acquisition premia may be driven by acquirers' proclivity to place risky investment bets on the growth potential of opaque targets. This pattern may partially explain frequent failures of mergers and acquisitions (M&A).