MERGERS, ACQUISITIONS, AND CORPORATE CONTROL
In recent years the scale and pace of merger activity have been
remarkable. For example, Table 6.1 lists just a few of the important mergers of 1998 and 1999.
Notice that the United States does not have a monopoly on merger activity. In recent years many of the largest mergers
have involved European firms.
The mergers listed in Table 6.1 involved big money. During periods of intense
merger activity financial managers
spend considerable time either searching for firms to acquire or
worrying whether some other firm is about to take over their company.
When one company buys another, it is making an investment, and the basic
principles of capital investment decisions
apply. You should go ahead with the purchase if it makes a net
contribution to shareholders`wealth. But mergers are often awkward transactions to evaluate, and you have to be
careful to define benefits and costs properly.
Many mergers are arranged amicably, but in other cases one firm will
make a hostile takeover bid for the other. We
describe the principal techniques of modern merger warfare, and since
the threat of hostile takeovers has stimulated
corporate restructurings and leveraged buyouts (LBOs), we describe them
too, and attempt to explain why these deals
have generated rewards for investors. We close with a look at who gains
and loses from mergers and we discuss whether mergers are beneficial on balance.After studying this
material you should be able to
_ Describe ways that companies change their ownership or
management.
_ Explain why it may make sense for companies to merge.
_ Estimate the gains and costs of mergers to the
acquiring firm.
_ Describe takeover defenses.
_ Summarize the evidence on whether mergers increase
efficiency and on how the gains from mergers are distributed between shareholders of the acquired and
acquiring firms. _ Explain
some of the motivations for leveraged and management buyouts of the firm.
The Market for
Corporate Control
The shareholders are the owners of the firm. But most shareholders do
not feel like the boss, and with good reason.
Try buying a share of General Motors stock and marching into the
boardroom for a chat with your employee, the chief executive officer.
The ownership and
management of
large corporations are almost always separated. Shareholders do not
directly appoint or supervise the
firm`s managers. They elect the board of directors, who act as their agents in
choosing and monitoring the managers of
the firm. Shareholders have a direct say in very few matters. Control of the
firm is in the hands of the managers,
subject to the general oversight of the board of directors. The separation of
ownership and management or control
creates potential agency costs. Agency costs occur when managers or directors take actions adverse to shareholders` interests.
The temptation to take such actions may be ever-present, but there are
many forces and constraints working to keep
managers` and shareholders` interests in line. As we pointed out
earlier, managers` paychecks in large corporations are almost always tied to the profitability of
the firm and the performance of its shares. Boards of directors take their responsibilities seriously ¤they may face
lawsuits if they don`t ¤and therefore are reluctant to rubber-stamp obviously
bad financial decisions.
But what ensures that the board has engaged the most talented managers?
What happens if managers are inadequate?
What if the board of directors is derelict in monitoring the performance
of managers? Or what if the firm`s managers
are fine, but resources of the firm could be used more efficiently by
merging with another firm? Can we count on
managers to pursue arrangements that would put them out of jobs? These
are all questions about the market
for corporate control, the mechanisms by which firms are matched up with management teams and
owners who can make the most of the
firm`s resources. You should not take a firm`s current ownership and management
for granted. If it is possible for the
value of the firm to be enhanced by changing management or by reorganizing
under new owners, there will be
incentives for someone to make a change.
There are four ways to change the management of a
firm. These are (1) a successful proxy contest in which a group of stockholders votes in a new group
of directors, who then pick a new management team; (2) the purchase of one firm by another in a merger
or acquisition; (3) a leveraged buyout of the firm by a private group of investors; and (4) a divestiture,
in which a firm either sells part of its operations to another company or spins it off as an independent firm.
We will review briefly each of these methods.
Category: Capital management
|