We use a sample of failed thrift auctions to examine if regulators learn from early transactions and improve their performance in later transactions. Our findings suggest that experience at failure resolution does not by itself lead to improved regulatory performance. Evidence of regulatory learning is restricted to dealings with repeat acquirers; in cases where an acquiring firm makes abnormal gains, regulators are able to restructure the auction process and eliminate such gains in subsequent acquisitions made by the same acquirers.

We examine voluntary acquisitions of solvent stock-held thrift institutions since 1979, and find that bidding firms suffered losses, target firms gained, and the impact of the merger on the bidder-target pair was positive on average. During the post-FIR-REA period acquirers experienced smaller losses and targets experienced smaller gains relative to the pre-FIRREA period. An investigation into the motives of bidding firm management provides evidence indicating the presence of synergy, agency, and hubris motivations in the pre-FIRREA period. Although the acquisitions environment underwent substantial changes in the post-FIRREA period, we find no evidence of corresponding changes in acquisition motivations.