Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpfi/9503001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Takeover Bidding with Toeholds: The Case of the Owner's Curse

Author

Listed:
  • Rajdeep Singh

    (Olin School of Business,Washington University)

Abstract
This paper demonstrates that winning a takeover bidding contest can be `bad news' and, consequently, losing can be `good news.' This is true even when all bidders act rationally in their own best interests with perfect information on their valuations. Bidders with toeholds rationally bid above their valuations and possibly suffer losses in equilibrium. This equilibrium strategy of `bidding to lose' played by partial owners leads to the `owner's curse.' The paper provides an explanation for acquirer losses without recourse to managerial `hubris' and/or agency problems. The presence of partial owners also has strong implications for the choice of selling mechanisms: firms should not be sold using a first price sealed-bid auction. The presence of large blockholders also acts as a costless defensive measure and partially substitutes for other costly defensive measures. The model gives rise to predictions on (1) the type of acquirers more likely to make losses; (2) the choice of auction procedures; (3) the effect of managerial ownership on firm value; (4) the existence of initial bid premia; and (5) the incentives of firms to engage in share repurchase, private placement and debt-for-equity swaps in the face of a takeover threat.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajdeep Singh, 1995. "Takeover Bidding with Toeholds: The Case of the Owner's Curse," Finance 9503001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpfi:9503001
    Note: 36 pages, postscript file and the compressed postscript file.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/fin/papers/9503/9503001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/fin/papers/9503/9503001.ps.gz
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stulz, ReneM., 1988. "Managerial control of voting rights : Financing policies and the market for corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 25-54, January.
    2. Yakov Amihud & Baruch Lev, 1981. "Risk Reduction as a Managerial Motive for Conglomerate Mergers," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 605-617, Autumn.
    3. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    4. Dann, Larry Y. & DeAngelo, Harry, 1988. "Corporate financial policy and corporate control : A study of defensive adjustments in asset and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 87-127, January.
    5. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    6. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-329, May.
    7. Riley, John G & Samuelson, William F, 1981. "Optimal Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 381-392, June.
    8. Israel, Ronen, 1991. "Capital Structure and the Market for Corporate Control: The Defensive Role of Debt Financing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1391-1409, September.
    9. Maskin, Eric S & Riley, John G, 1984. "Optimal Auctions with Risk Averse Buyers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(6), pages 1473-1518, November.
    10. Jensen, Michael C. & Ruback, Richard S., 1983. "The market for corporate control : The scientific evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 5-50, April.
    11. Roll, Richard, 1986. "The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(2), pages 197-216, April.
    12. Israel, Ronen, 1992. "Capital and Ownership Structures, and the Market for Corporate Control," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 5(2), pages 181-198.
    13. Berkovitch, Elazar & Narayanan, M. P., 1993. "Motives for Takeovers: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 347-362, September.
    14. Chowdhry, Bhagwan & Nanda, Vikram, 1993. "The Strategic Role of Debt in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(2), pages 731-745, June.
    15. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    16. Hirshleifer, David, 1989. "Facilitation of Competing Bids and the Price of a Takeover Target," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt2496649g, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    17. Hirshleifer, David & Titman, Sheridan, 1990. "Share Tendering Strategies and the Success of Hostile Takeover Bids," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 295-324, April.
    18. Sanford J. Grossman & Oliver D. Hart, 1980. "Takeover Bids, the Free-Rider Problem, and the Theory of the Corporation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 42-64, Spring.
    19. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    20. Mark Bagnoli, Barton L. Lipman, 1988. "Successful Takeovers without Exclusion," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 89-110.
    21. Back, Kerry & Zender, Jaime F, 1993. "Auctions of Divisible Goods: On the Rationale for the Treasury Experiment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(4), pages 733-764.
    22. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1988. "Corporate control contests and capital structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 55-86, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martynova, M., 2006. "The market for corporate control and corporate governance regulation in Europe," Other publications TiSEM 8651e281-4914-41f2-ac14-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Eckbo, B. Espen, 2009. "Bidding strategies and takeover premiums: A review," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 149-178, February.
    3. Panunzi, Fausto & Mueller, Holger, 2003. "Tender Offers and Leverage," CEPR Discussion Papers 3964, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Taher Hamza, 2009. "La performance à court et à long terme de l'acquéreur:l'impact de la détention d'une position de contrôle," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 12(1), pages 33-65, March.
    5. Taher Hamza, 2011. "Determinants of short-term value creation for the bidder: evidence from France," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 15(2), pages 157-186, May.
    6. Henrik Cronqvist & Fredrik Heyman & Mattias Nilsson & Helena Svaleryd & Jonas Vlachos, 2009. "Do Entrenched Managers Pay Their Workers More?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(1), pages 309-339, February.
    7. Mike Burkart & Samuel Lee, 2008. "One Share - One Vote: the Theory," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-49.
    8. Ampenberger, Markus & Schmid, Thomas & Achleitner, Ann-Kristin & Kaserer, Christoph, 2009. "Capital structure decisions in family firms: empirical evidence from a bank-based economy," CEFS Working Paper Series 2009-05, Technische Universität München (TUM), Center for Entrepreneurial and Financial Studies (CEFS).
    9. Martynova, M. & Renneboog, L.D.R., 2006. "The Performance of the European Market for Corporate Control : Evidence from the 5th Takeover Wave," Discussion Paper 2006-118, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. Sercu, P. & Van Hulle, C., 1995. "On the structure of take-over models, and insider-outsider conflicts in negotiated take-overs," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 11-44, April.
    11. Dasgupta, Sudipto & Tsui, Kevin, 2003. "A "matching auction" for targets with heterogeneous bidders," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 331-364, October.
    12. Linda Allen & Julapa Jagtiani & Stavros Peristiani & Anthony Saunders, 2002. "The role of bank advisors in mergers and acquisitions," Staff Reports 143, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    13. Jeremy Bulow & Ming Huang & Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Toeholds and Takeovers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 427-454, June.
    14. Loyola, Gino, 2012. "Optimal and efficient takeover contests with toeholds," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 203-216.
    15. Fluck, Zsuzsanna, 1999. "The Dynamics of the Management-Shareholder Conflict," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 379-404.
    16. Westman, Hanna, 2011. "The impact of management and board ownership on profitability in banks with different strategies," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 3300-3318.
    17. Hingorani, Archana & Lehn, Kenneth & Makhija, Anil K., 1997. "Investor behavior in mass privatization: The case of the Czech voucher scheme," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 349-396, June.
    18. Ana I. Fernández & Silvia Gómez-Ansón, 1999. "Un estudio de las Ofertas Públicas de Adquisición en el mercado de valores español," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 23(3), pages 471-495, September.
    19. Matthew J. Clayton & S. Abraham Ravid, 1999. "The Effect of Leverage on Bidding Behavior: Theory and Evidence from the FCC Auctions," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 99-055, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
    20. Burkart, Mike & Lee, Samuel, 2010. "Signalling in tender offer games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119085, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G - Financial Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpfi:9503001. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.