To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
9 results ✕ Clear filters

Target-firm information asymmetry and acquirer returns

Review of Finance 2009 13(3), 467-493
We show that acquirer returns are significantly higher in stock-swap acquisitions of difficult-to-value targets, as measured by R&D intensity and idiosyncratic return volatility. This finding contributes to an explanation of the determinants of, and value gains from, using stock as a method of payment. The effects of target-valuation uncertainty on both the method of payment and the market reaction to acquisitions are more likely to be apparent in samples of private acquisitions, as these effects can be masked in samples of acquisitions of publicly held targets. Nevertheless, our results hold for publicly traded targets in multivariate analysis.

The importance of target information in the acquisition of privately held firms

Journal of Corporate Finance 2022 77, 102309
Privately held companies make-up the vast majority of targets in corporate takeovers. When disclosure is not required, acquiring firms usually provide little to no information about either the deal or the target in these transactions. The absence of such information may be innocuous if investors believe it to be unimportant. We examine whether investors respond to basic information disclosed by acquirers of private targets. Our evidence suggests investors respond to the disclosure of deal value whereas sales information of the target is unimportant compared to transactions where such information is not disclosed. Our results are robust to using a matched sample of deals with and without the disclosure of deal value and sales information. Using a subset of hand-collected data, our study also provides insight into the method and timing by which acquirers disclose information about private targets. Altogether, our evidence suggests regulatory policies surrounding seemingly insignificant, private acquisitions should consider the disclosure of deal value to be important to investors.

What all-cash companies tell us about IPOs and acquisitions

Journal of Corporate Finance 2014 29, 111-121
We examine the IPOs of and acquisitions made by special purpose acquisition corporations (SPACs). This unique sample provides a perspective on these two corporate events unencumbered by much of the typical confounding information. We find the IPO gross spreads of these simple firms similar to the spreads accompanying the IPOs of much more complex firms. This result is consistent with illogically sticky spreads. We find acquirer announcement returns roughly triple that of typical acquisitions. Since these returns disproportionately reflect the valuation split between acquirer and target, they suggest that the lower returns of typical acquisitions stem from overestimating synergies and/or new information regarding the bidder.

An inconsistency in SEC disclosure requirements? The case of the “insignificant” private target

Journal of Corporate Finance 2007 13(2-3), 251-269
Although the SEC's main charge is to ensure the disclosure of material information, it has not always consistently defined materiality. We show that acquisitions of privately-held targets classified as “insignificant” by the SEC appreciably affect market prices, and therefore are material by the SEC's definition. We find significant returns in transactions with targets as small as 2% – compared with the SEC's disclosure threshold of 20% – of the acquirer. Further, an average of 19 undisclosed private acquisitions per year exceed the median IPO value in the same year for our sample period. However, because the SEC deems these transactions insignificant, information like target financial statements remains undisclosed to the market. Disclosure rules regarding target financial statements thus create a regulatory disconnect, in which information that is material is nevertheless deemed “insignificant” and therefore not disclosed.

The rise of corporate governance in corporate control research

Journal of Corporate Finance 2009 15(1), 1-9
This article has two related tasks. First, we review the articles published in this Special Issue on Corporate Control, Mergers, and Acquisitions. These articles provide new evidence on several aspects of corporate control and governance including the value and performance effects of various ownership groups, the impact of internal governance structures, the effects of regulatory changes on specific industries and evidence on bidding strategies in takeovers. This analysis leads us to our second task – to examine the evolution of corporate control research, broadly defined. Our analysis shows a movement in research from mergers and acquisitions to a broader analysis of corporate governance, especially internal governance features. We suggest that there is a trend toward an increase in the relative importance of internal governance compared to discipline from the market from corporate control. This trend reflects an important change over the past several decades in the means through which the market disciplines corporate behavior.

The underpricing of private targets

Journal of Financial Economics 2009 93(1), 51-66
We examine acquisitions of private firms with valuation histories and find a positive relation between acquirer announcement returns and target valuation revisions. Similar to other studies, acquirer announcement returns are positive, on average. However, positive acquirer announcement returns are mainly driven by targets that are acquired for more than their prior valuation. This relation is consistent with pricing effects associated with target valuation uncertainty and behavioral biases in negotiation outcomes.

Investment banking relationships and analyst affiliation bias: The impact of the global settlement on sanctioned and non-sanctioned banks

Journal of Financial Economics 2017 124(3), 614-631
We examine the impact of the Global Settlement on affiliation bias in analyst recommendations. Using a broad measure of investment bank-firm relationships, we find a substantial reduction in analyst affiliation bias following the settlement for sanctioned banks. In contrast, we find strong evidence of bias both before and after the settlement for affiliated analysts at non-sanctioned banks. Our results suggest that the settlement led to an increase in the expected costs of issuing biased coverage at sanctioned banks, while concurrent self-regulatory organization rule changes were largely ineffective at reducing the influence of investment banking on analyst research at large non-sanctioned banks.

Implications of Data Screens on Merger and Acquisition Analysis: A Large Sample Study of Mergers and Acquisitions from 1992 to 2009

Review of Financial Studies 2011 24(7), 2316-2357
We analyze a comprehensive set of mergers and acquisitions from SDC data from 1992 through 2009. We do not impose common restrictions such as excluding private bidders, small targets, or deals without a deal value. We show a broader scope of mergers and acquisitions activity than that implied in the literature, which generally oversamples larger deals involving public firms. Further, some of our results differ from the extant literature. For example, the finding that mergers occur in waves is attenuated with a greater presence of smaller and/or non-public firms. Also, acquirers gain in most takeovers despite a threefold decline over the sample period in acquirer returns.

What Do Returns to Acquiring Firms Tell Us? Evidence from Firms That Make Many Acquisitions

Journal of Finance 2002 57(4), 1763-1793
ABSTRACT We study shareholder returns for firms that acquired five or more public, private, and/or subsidiary targets within a short time period. Since the same bidder chooses different types of targets and methods of payment, any variation in returns must be due to the characteristics of the target and the bid. Results indicate bidder shareholders gain when buying a private firm or subsidiary but lose when purchasing a public firm. Further, the return is greater the larger the target and if the bidder offers stock. These results are consistent with a liquidity discount, and tax and control effects in this market.