The market for corporate control is generally regarded as an important disciplinary mechanism in well developed economies. Entrenchment mechanisms commonly used by US firms in the form of anti-takeover provisions (ATPs) may offer some protection from disciplinary action, facilitating entrenchment and value-reducing behavior. One manifestation of entrenchment is poor acquisitions, with the literature reporting significant losses to large acquirers, and to acquirers with a higher number of ATPs. We examine the profitability of acquisitions in Australia, a market where US-style ATPs are prohibited. The results show that unlike their US counterparts, large Australian acquirers earn significant value for their shareholders, both in terms of announcement returns and long-run operating performance improvements. Takeover premiums are also substantially lower than those reported for the US and UK, and do not differ between large and small acquirers. Premiums are also positively correlated with long-run operating performance, indicating that they reflect real synergies, as opposed to hubris or overpayment. We also find that bidders who destroy value in takeovers are likely to be subsequently acquired. However, unlike US evidence, larger acquirers are just as likely to be targeted for takeover as smaller acquirers, indicating that size is not an effective impediment to the disciplining function of the market for corporate control in Australia. The findings are robust to several econometric issues common to the type of models used in our analysis.

This paper examines the relationship between acquirer size, sovereign governance, and value-creation in acquisitions. Prior literature indicates that larger acquirers' acquisitions create less shareholder wealth in developed markets, arising primarily from agency and entrenchment problems. However, in weak governance environments, size might have off-setting benefits, including increased market power and political connections. We use a sample of 17,647 takeovers from 45 countries to examine the acquirer size effect around the world. We find that the acquirer size effect exists internationally, but is smaller in magnitude in weak governance markets. Compared with larger acquirers in strong governance countries, large acquirers in weak governance countries do takeovers that generate higher stock-returns and increase post-takeover operating performance. Their deals are also more likely to be friendly, and take less time to complete. We also find that the benefits of larger acquirer size increase with the importance of political connections in the acquirer's country. The results suggest that country-governance can moderate the impact of corporate characteristics, such as corporate size.

This paper examines the role of firm-level experience in the context of divestitures. We find that divesting firms that have recent divestiture experience (hereafter, experienced divestors) are more likely to sell peripheral or underperforming units, and to divest during industry merger waves. Experienced divestors earn higher returns on divestiture announcement, have stronger operating performance post-divestiture, and tend to reinvest sale proceeds in expansion programs using acquisitions. Importantly, we show that divestiture experience at the firm level dominates other measures of experience, including divestiture experience of CEOs or boards, and experience in acquisitions. We take steps to mitigate concerns about econometric and sampling issues. These findings suggest that a strategy of restructuring through divestitures can improve firm value.

This paper examines takeover and divestiture activity at the industry level for the population of UK firms over the period 1986–2000. Consistent with US research, takeovers in the UK cluster both across industries and over time. The evidence for divestitures indicates clustering across industries only. The paper further investigates whether broad and specific industry shocks (e.g., growth, free cash flow, concentration, deregulation, foreign competition, technology, stock market performance) explain takeover and divestiture clustering at the industry level. The results suggest that broad shocks increase (decrease) the likelihood of takeovers (divestitures), although not significantly for takeovers. Specific industry shocks that increase the likelihood of takeover activity include low growth, the threat of foreign competition and high stock market performance. For divestitures, high industry concentration and deregulation increase activity. Little evidence is found for deregulation as a significant factor in explaining takeover activity.

Using several benchmarks and operating performance measures, the results from this paper suggest that takeovers completed in the UK over the period 1985 to 1993 result in modest improvements in operating performance. Using a matching procedure similar to that employed by Loughran and Ritter [J. Finance 52 (1997) 1823], in which benchmark firms are selected on the basis of several pre-takeover characteristics, the median increase in post-takeover performance for acquiring firms ranges from 0.13% per annum to a statistically significant 1.78% per annum, depending on the definition of operating performance used and choice of deflator. Using the same matching scheme in a Healy et al. [J. Financ. Econ. 31 (1992) 135] methodology, in which post-takeover performance is regressed on a combined target and acquirer pre-takeover performance, reveals larger improvements in operating performance, ranging from 0.80% to a statistically significant 3.1%, again depending on the definition of operating performance employed and deflator chosen. While there is some evidence that factors such as industrial relatedness and the removal of the target CEO have an impact on post-takeover performance, method of payment is found to have an insignificant impact.

We argue that the method of payment in cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) can mitigate country-level governance risk for the acquirer. We find a greater use of stock as the method of payment in cross-border deals involving targets from countries with high governance risk relative to that in the acquirer's country. This increased use of stock in riskier cross-border deals is consistent with the optimal reaction of the acquirer to avoid overpayment, even though we also show that the use of stock (instead of cash) as the method of payment in cross-border deals is associated with a lower likelihood of deal completion. Furthermore, for more recent periods (i.e., after 2000) we show that the use of stock (cash) has increased (decreased) significantly in cross-border deals, resulting in convergence with the method of payment used in domestic deals.

Prior work has established that entrenched managers make value-decreasing acquisitions. In this study, we determine how they destroy that value. Overall, we find that value destruction by entrenched managers comes from a combination of factors. First, they disproportionately avoid private targets, which have been shown to be generally associated with value creation. Second, when they do buy private targets or public targets with blockholders, they tend not to use all-equity offers, which has the effect of avoiding the transfer of a valuable blockholder to the bidder. We further test whether entrenched managers simply overpay for good targets or choose targets with lower synergies. We find that while they overpay, they also choose low synergy targets in the first place, as shown by combined announcement returns and post-merger operating performance.

We examine if trade credit helped financially constrained SMEs survive the recent financial crisis. Using data for 202,696 SMEs across 13 European countries over the period 2003–2012, we show that trade credit had a large positive impact on firm survival, such that a one standard deviation increase in trade credit results in a 21% decrease in the likelihood of distress. We also report evidence of a significant redistribution effect, with cash rich or unconstrained SMEs extending significantly more net trade credit than their less financially resourced counterparts. The results are robust to several econometric concerns.