Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
D. Ravenscraft, F. Scherer (1989)
The profitability of mergersInternational Journal of Industrial Organization, 7
(1992)
Mergers : Theory and Evidence , ” in , ed . ,
Stephen O'Byrne (1996)
EVA® AND MARKET VALUEJournal of Applied Corporate Finance, 9
S. Kaplan, M. Weisbach (1990)
The Success of Acquisitions: Evidence from Disvestitures
H. White (1980)
A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for HeteroskedasticityEconometrica, 48
G. Meeks, J. Meeks (1981)
PROFITABILITY MEASURES AS INDICATORS OF POST-MERGER EFFICIENCY: REPLYJournal of Industrial Economics, 33
(1988)
Do Mergers Improve Corporate Performance ?
Nikhil Varaiya, K. Ferris (1987)
Overpaying in Corporate Takeovers: The Winner’s CurseFinancial Analysts Journal, 43
P. Healy, K. Palepu, Richard Ruback (1990)
Does Corporate Performance Improve after Mergers?Management Practice
Mergers and acquisitions are clearly the favorite corporate growth strategy of this generation's executive teams. But there is little evidence that such strategies have paid off for the acquiring companies' shareholders–and many transactions have proved disastrous for the careers of the executives as well as the pocketbooks of the shareholders of the acquiring firms. This article presents a methodology for evaluating post‐acquisition operating performance from the perspective of the acquiring company's shareholders. The cornerstone of the method is a performance benchmark that incorporates the operating performance expectations built into the pre‐acquisition market values of the two companies plus the additional promise of performance created by the payment of an acquisition premium. After illustrating the use of this methodology in the case of an actual acquisition, the article goes on to present the results of a study (using 41 major strategic acquisitions from the period 1979–1990) of the extent to which stock market reactions to acquirers are useful predictors of actual performance over a five‐year period following the acquisition. The results of the study provide strong support for building current market expectations into the benchmarking methodology. The 1990s are often said to have initiated an era of so‐called “strategic” mergers. The clear message from this analysis is that, even if a deal is deemed “strategic,” it will not add value unless the realized synergies justify the acquisition premium. The burden of proof is on the acquirer to demonstrate to the market that they will. This article provides a tool that senior executives can use both for pre‐acquisition analysis and pricing and for post‐acquisition performance evaluation and incentive compensation.
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance – Wiley
Published: Jun 1, 1998
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.