Search results

Cross‐border mergers and acquisitions present significant opportunities for firms wishing to diversify their activities geographically, learn new knowledge, and gain access to valuable resources. Cross‐border mergers and acquisitions present multiple challenges as well. These include the difficulty of evaluating target firms, cultural and institutional differences, and the liabilities of foreignness among others. We compare acquisitions to enter new markets with other market entry mechanisms (strategic alliances and greenfield ventures), and conclude with suggestions for future research to advance our knowledge of this strategy of increasing importance globally.

Drawing attention to the significant number of unsuccessful (abandoned) cross-border merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions in recent years, the purpose of this paper is to analyze three litigated cross-border inbound acquisitions that associated with an emerging economy – India, such as Vodafone-Hutchison and Bharti Airtel-MTN deals in the telecommunications industry, and Vedanta-Cairn India deal in the oil and gas exploration industry. The study intends to explore how do institutional and political environments in the host country affect the completion likelihood of cross-border acquisition negotiations.

Nested within the interdisciplinary framework, the study adopts a legitimate method in qualitative research, that is, case study method, and performs a unit of analysis and cross-case analysis of sample cases.

The critical analysis suggests that government officials’ erratic nature and ruling political party intervention have detrimental effects on the success of Indian-hosted cross-border deals with higher bid value, listed target firm, cash payment, and stronger government control in the target industry. The findings emerge from the cross-case analysis of sample cases contribute to the Lucas paradox – why does not capital flow from rich to poor countries and interdisciplinary M&A literature on the completion likelihood of international takeovers.

The findings have several implications for multinational managers who typically involve in cross-border negotiations. The causes and consequences of sample cases would help develop economy firms who intend to invest in emerging economies. The study also offers some implications of M&A for telecommunications and extractive industries.

Although a huge amount of extant research investigates why M&A fail to create value to the shareholders during the public announcement and post-merger stages, there is a significant dearth of research on the causes and consequences of delayed or abandoned national and international deals. The paper fills this knowledge gap by discussing an in-depth cross-case analysis of Indian-hosted cross-border acquisitions.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the motives of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M & A) by Indian companies for the period 1998 through 2009. The study has also attempted to ascertain the post-merger paybacks realized by the sample acquirer companies. It also identifies the motives which help in improving the post-merger performance. The preference of the motives and post-merger paybacks realized across the development status of the host economy, age and industry of the company has also been found.

This paper uses a survey approach to collect the responses over the motives and post-merger paybacks. Statistical tools, namely, Likert scale, factor analysis, independent samples t-test and binary logistic regression have been used.

The study found that there are five motives of cross-border M & A – value creation, improvement in efficiency, market leadership, marketing and strategic motives and synergistic gains. The results also indicated that the acquirer firms expect cost and financial efficiency, stakeholders’ benefits and employee welfare post acquisition. The motive of value creation significantly improves the post-merger financial performance.

The study has only considered the cross-border M & A but not domestic M & A.

The research is an attempt to understand the dynamics which are responsible for motivating Indian companies to go abroad for acquisitions. Thus, it would help the prospective Indian acquirer companies to focus on the motives which help in improving the post-merger financial performance.

This research paper is original as it explores the motivation of Indian companies for entering into cross-border M & A. It adds to the extant literature of cross-border M & A by emerging economies multinational enterprises.

Given that several publicly announced international merger and acquisition deals have been abandoned in recent years, the purpose of this paper is to present a synthesis of influential articles that examine organizational characteristics of cross-border acquisition transactions. The synthesis is framed through general traits and resources, learning and prior acquisition experience, and top-level management and governance attributes. Specifically, the paper conceptualizes key organizational attributes influencing the propensity of cross-border negotiations, and the most common characteristics and post-deal effects by illustrating several case examples from around the world.

Owing to fairness and integrity principles of the literature survey studies, the paper adopts an exploratory review design to present a synthesis of several influential articles published in strategy, international business and corporate finance journals. Since case method and storytelling are the best qualitative approaches to conceptualizing extant theoretical contributions, a number of case examples—successful, delayed and abandoned—from around the world have been discussed by leveraging the case information from archival sources.

Drawing on resource-based view, organizational learning, upper echelons and agency theory perspectives, the paper underscores three observations. First, organizational characteristics such as firm age, firm size, ownership structure, slack resources, marketing resources, technological intensity, export intensity and business group affiliation have different impacts on the propensity of publicly announced cross-border deals. Second, firm’s prior acquisition experience and firm’s acquisition experience in the target country have positive or moderating effects on the success of a cross-border merger. Third, top-level management characteristics such as CEO foreign nationality and CEO international career experience, and governance characteristics such as board size, the number of independent directors and directors with overseas experience, have mixed effects on the incidence of cross-border acquisitions.

The paper puts forth several recommendations for top-level managers participating in cross-border acquisition negotiations, such as learning from peers in the same industry, learning from predecessors in the target country and learning from failure negotiations in the same industry and other industries.

Nested within the organizational, international business strategy and corporate finance literature, the paper presents a synthesis of influential publications that study organizational characteristics affecting the propensity of cross-border acquisitions. The cases discussed in this paper are unique examples from around the world.

This paper aims to examine the influence of key macroeconomic factors on the inward and outward acquisition activities of six ASEAN (ASEAN: Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries, namely, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, over the 1996-2015 period.

The study uses alternative panel data methods, including pooled mean group, mean group and dynamic fixed-effect estimators.

The results indicate that gross domestic product (GDP), interest rate, exchange rate, money supply and inflation rate are the most important macroeconomic factors explaining the trends of cross-border mergers and acquisition outflows of the ASEAN-6 countries. Specifically, GDP, money supply and inflation rate have significant positive relationships with acquisition outflows, while interest rate and exchange rate exert significant negative influence. On the other hand, the authors find four significant macroeconomic factors explaining the trends of the inward acquisitions. Essentially, GDP, money supply and inflation rate have significant positive impacts on inward acquisitions, while the impact of exchange rate is negatively significant.

Unavailability of data limits this study to pool six sample countries from ASEAN, instead of ten representative member countries.

The results of this study can signal to firms or investors, involving in cross-border mergers and acquisitions, where to direct foreign resources flows. Moreover, having the knowledge about the relative levels of market size and other macroeconomic factors in both home and host countries can be of great importance for investment decision. Therefore, policymakers of ASEAN countries should make appropriate macroeconomic policies that can stimulate inward and outward acquisitions.

The main contribution of this paper is that it is the first to present the analysis of macroeconomic influences on the trends of inward and outward merger and acquisition activities in six ASEAN countries.

We study the wealth effects of 177 domestic and cross‐border acquisitions announced by Spanish corporations between 1990 and 2004. Our findings show that domestic transactions significantly outperform international transactions. However, controlling for several firm and transaction characteristics, we do not find any cross‐border effect for acquisitions of Spanish firms. Short‐term valuation is driven by three factors in particular. Target size and bidder’s profitability negatively affect announcement returns, whereas transactions in related industries have a positive effect. Our results may indicate that in contrast to prior empirical findings, international diversification incurs higher costs than synergies and is, among others, driven by managerial and ownership factors.

This paper focuses on the influence of overconfident managers on strategic investment acquisitions performance, by investigating the influence of key contextual factors on acquirers’ returns of UK domestic and cross-border acquisitions during the period 2000-2009. In this study, particular attention has been paid to management attributes (frequent acquirers vs non-frequent acquirers); method of payment (cash vs non-cash deals); the geographic scope (domestic vs cross-border deals); the type of the target (public vs private); the industry scope; and the relative size.

An event study is used to analyse domestic and cross-border acquisitions. The market model is used for estimating the acquirers’ abnormal returns of 1,133 domestic and cross-border acquisitions by UK firms between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2009.

The findings reveal that acquirers with domestic targets have higher returns than cross-border targets. Infrequent acquirers generate higher returns from domestic and cross-border acquisitions than frequent acquirers. Further, acquirers that acquire domestic targets from different industrial sectors produce higher returns than acquirers with targets from the same sector. Acquirers with cash deals, private targets and high book-to-market ratio generate significant returns compared to acquirers with non-cash deals, low book-to-market ratio and public targets and that for domestic and cross-border deals. These results suggest that UK domestic and cross-border acquisitions are partially shaped by overconfident managers.

The study has a number of limitations, including the use of the market model, the data-collection process and the limited number of contextual factors. Future research may examine a number of avenues related to the current study, including incorporating the acquiring firms’ financial characteristics.

The study provides a better understanding of the influence of contextual factors on the success and failure of strategic investment projects such as acquisitions. Results of post-acquisitions performance in UK firms show how estimation of value can be distracted at the pre-acquisition stage because of overconfident managers.

Results of post-acquisitions performance in UK firms show how estimation of value can be distracted at the pre-acquisition stage because of overconfident managers.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the trend towards cross‐border mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and review best practices for successful cross‐border M&A transactions (and how they differ from executing national deals).

The objectives are achieved through a review of four best practices for successful planning, implementation and execution of cross‐border deals. Also, a March 2006 Accenture/Economist Intelligence Unit survey is used which highlights trends towards cross‐border deals and common pitfalls in the successful execution of deals – in particular the difficulties in addressing cultural issues and local due diligence.

The paper finds that executives believe in their M&A strategy but doubt their organizational ability to successfully implement and execute and to realize financial gains and cross‐border deals offer a different mix of opportunities and risks, which need to be understood and managed if the deals are to be successful. The key to success lies in understanding exactly what makes cross‐border deal making different, and in developing the skills needed to create value.

There are four key drivers of success in cross‐border M&A: start with a clear and compelling strategy – the most successful cross‐border acquirers begin with a clear view of both the role that cross‐border acquisitions will play in their strategy and the type of companies best equipped to fill that role; do your homework – the greatest risks in cross‐border transactions arise from the failure to understand the culture, regulatory structure or competitive environment – and sometimes all three considerations – in the target market; value your new people – regardless of the rationale for the acquisition, a key asset – many would argue the most important one – in a cross‐border acquisition is people; and execution, execution, execution – successful execution begins early – in some cases, long before the deal is done.

A recent survey (Accenture/Economist Intelligence Unit, March 2006) shows for the first time that among global M&A deals, cross‐border transactions now exceed domestic transactions – and this trend is likely to continue. Yet for many c‐level executives, the prospect of acquiring or merging with a company in an unfamiliar market is daunting – and cross‐border M&A is considered more difficult than executing on domestic deals. This paper is intended to give c‐level executives practical, hands‐on advice for conducting cross‐border M&A as well as publicizing survey results specifically on the cross‐border M&A trend.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&) are increasingly becoming a strategy of choice for companies attempting to achieve and sustain competitive advantage. However, not all M&As are a success. In this paper, we examine the three main reasons highlighted in the literature as major causes of M&A failure (clashing corporate cultures, absence of clear communication, and employee involvement) in three Indian pharmaceutical companies, and we analyze the role played by the HR function in addressing them. Also, we discuss the importance of gaining the commitment and focus of the workforce during the acquisition process through employee involvement.

The aim of this research is to find out which mergers and acquisitions (M&A) market is better able to absorb all the shocks from legislations in securities and banking in Europe and the USA, 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the USA, and other global events. The most exogenous or self‐dependent market may be the mover and shaker in the M&A deals in the world. The sample period spans from October 1998 to September 2004.

This research uses cointegration and innovation accounting techniques (variance decomposition analysis and impulse response functions) to find out: if the two M&A markets are linked and explained each other in the long‐run; which of the two markets can able to withstand all the list shocks in the observed period; how long each of the market is about to deal with the shocks (are the shocks long‐lasting or short‐lasting?).

The major findings are: The cointegration results indicate that the M&A markets in Europe and the USA tend to move together in the long‐run, particularly, the European M&A deals (EUMA) and US cross‐border M&A deals in Europe (USCROSS). On one hand, the most consistent result from the variance decomposition analysis and impulse response functions is that the European M&A market is the most exogenous or self‐dependent market in the observed period. On the other hand, the most interactive market (less able to deal with the shocks) is the US M&A market (USMA) because it is significantly impacted by the legislations in securities and banking, 9/11 and other global events. US cross‐border M&A deals in Europe (USCROSS) and European cross‐border M&A deals in the USA (EUCROSS) are able to deal with the shocks when the order of VAR is 6. However, when the order of VAR is extended to 12 they are less able to absorb the shocks.

The limitation of the data at that time did not allow examination of US M&A deals with individual European countries, particularly, United Kingdom that has historically invested in the US more than any country in Europe.

The pivotal conclusion of this study suggests that EUMA and USCROOS move together in the long‐run and EUMA is the strongest market in dealing with shocks, the world business may be gradually shifting to Europe. Practically, most of the multinational corporations (MNCs), especially the US MNCs are craving for market niches in Europe.

The real value of this paper is that the changing financial landscape is the US implies that all the shake‐up may lead to Europe. Philosophically, “all roads lead to Rome” New trends in world business is that the center of gravity in business may be pointing to Europe.