Universität Hohenheim

Eingang zum Volltext

Kolb, Johannes

Empirical essays on acquisitions

Empirische Aufsätze im Bereich M&A


Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgende
URN: urn:nbn:de:bsz:100-opus-13723
URL: http://opus.uni-hohenheim.de/volltexte/2017/1372/

Dokument 1.pdf (1.943 KB)
Dokument in Google Scholar suchen:
Social Media:
Delicious Diese Seite zu Mister Wong hinzufügen Studi/Schüler/Mein VZ Twitter Facebook Connect
SWD-Schlagwörter: Mergers and Acquisitions , Berater , Investmentbank , Auszeichnung , Europa , Corporate Governance , Going Public
Freie Schlagwörter (Englisch): mergers and acquisitions , investment banks , awards , SPACs , law and finance
Institut: Institut für Financial Management
Fakultät: Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften
DDC-Sachgruppe: Wirtschaft
Dokumentart: Dissertation
Hauptberichter: Tykvová, Tereza Dr.
Sprache: Englisch
Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 22.06.2017
Erstellungsjahr: 2017
Publikationsdatum: 11.07.2017
Lizenz: Hohenheimer Lizenzvertrag Veröffentlichungsvertrag mit der Universitätsbibliothek Hohenheim ohne Print-on-Demand
Kurzfassung auf Englisch: ACQUISITIONS are among the most studied areas in corporate finance research. Still, many questions about acquisitions are unanswered and regularly debated in the literature. One of these questions is whether acquisitions create value for shareholders as well as stakeholders and what factors are related to value creation. The overarching question raised in this thesis is whether and how financial stakeholders and shareholders profit from acquisitions in different scenarios, i.e.:
• Do bidder shareholders profit when financial advisors are involved in corporate acquisitions, and does the quality of financial advisors matter? Do high-quality advisors create more bidder shareholder value than lower quality advisors?
• Do firms and SPAC shareholders profit from SPAC acquisitions? How do these firms (SPAC target firms) perform in comparison to firms that use an IPO to go public?
This thesis consists of three empirical articles in which I address the above outlined questions. The first article focuses on the European market and asks whether the involvement of advisors in corporate acquisitions matters for bidder value creation. Although theoretical frameworks predict a positive relationship between advisor involvement and shareholder value creation, it is not confirmed by empirical evidence (see, e.g., Servaes and Zenner, 1996; Wang and Whyte, 2010). My results suggest that advisors provide value to their clients only when both the bidder and the target are located in the UK. Moreover, a difference-in-difference analysis, using a major European regulatory reform, indicates that advisors matter for shareholder value creation in acquisitions.
The second article focuses not only on the question whether an advisor is involved in an acquisition but also on whether the quality of the advisor plays a role. In theory, high-quality advisors should be able to create more shareholder value for their clients than lower-quality advisors (see, e.g., Golubov et al., 2012). However, different authors find an insignificant, negative or positive relationship between advisor quality and value creation. Since these studies rely on advisor market shares or related measures to assess advisor quality and since evidence suggests that advisor market shares are not a good predictor of advisor performance (Bao and Edmans, 2011), we develop a new proxy to capture advisor quality. We define high-quality advisors as advisors that have won an award of excellence (i.e., best M&A house) and focus on the North American market. The results suggest that there is a positive relationship between award winners and value creation. Moreover, clients of award winners seem to outperform clients of non-award winners in the long term and seem to realize greater synergies. The results hold when we consider the endogenous choice of an advisor. Finally, it seems that award winners put more effort into acquisitions that are more visible.
The last article focuses on SPAC acquisitions, which combine acquisitions with initial public offerings to enable firms a fast and cheap listing at a public stock exchange. We compare firms that use SPAC acquisitions to access the public market with firms that use IPOs to access the public market. The results from the analysis of 127 SPAC acquisitions and 1,128 IPOs during the wave of “new-generation” SPACs starting in 2003 suggest that SPAC acquisitions profit firms that are small, highly levered and have low growth opportunities in times with turbulent market environments. It seems that venture capital and private equity investors rather stick to the traditional way, the IPO, to bring their portfolio firms to the public market. Furthermore, firms that access the market via SPAC acquisitions underperform the market and similar IPO firms in the long run.
The results of this thesis provide some evidence that financial advisors do play a crucial role and that shareholders might profit from their involvement in acquisitions. Moreover, innovations in financial markets that promise to improve the protection of shareholder interests, such as SPAC acquisitions, should be analyzed by the market participants with great care. On the one hand, they might provide value for certain firms (that are not able to access the public markets via an IPO); on the other hand, they seem to hurt shareholders that are interested in long-term gains.

    © 1996 - 2016 Universität Hohenheim. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.  15.04.15