The Potential Impact Of The Market

Whether or not the merger acquisition is successful depends on (a) the net present value of the investment and (b) paper announcement of the merger. I mean once the merger is sealed, between three and eleven days, changes in the company’s value (the accurer and target) at the time of annoucement of the merger determines the acquisition financial success. The paper announcement returns is supported by Andrade Mitchell and Stafford (2011) after using the database of University of Chicago. Simulation analysis can also be used.

Major companies and corporations that comprise a big part of the United States economy take advantage of certain opportunities such as going public through IPO’s, acquisitions, and mergers. These three approaches provide an additional resource and many times an advantage to expand, become more profitable, or simply save a company’s existence.

Through the cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) that a company receives from the merger, we were able to see the effects of second requests and complaints on the company’s stock price over time. This methodology of using event studies to gauge the effects of mergers and the antitrust agency involvement was first applied by Eckbo (1983), and most recently by Filson, Olfati, and Radoniqi (2015). The event studies used in both of these journals and the others mentioned within the review of literature give us a good understanding of how accurate event studies are for predicting the effects that second requests or complaints given out by antitrust agencies can have on merging firms and within their

Merger motives that are questionable on economic grounds are diversification, purchase of assets below replacement cost, and control. Managers often state that diversification helps to stabilize a firm's earnings and reduces total risk, hence benefits shareholders. Stabilization of earnings is certainly beneficial to a firm's employees, suppliers, customers, and managers. However, if a stock investor is concerned about earnings variability, he or she can diversify more easily than the firm can. Why should Firm A and Firm B merge to stabilize earnings when stockholders can merely purchase both stocks and accomplish the same thing? Further, we know that well-diversified shareholders are more concerned with a stock's market risk than with its total risk, and higher earnings instability does not necessarily translate into higher market risk.

Theoretically it is assumed that mergers improve the performance of the acquiring firm due to

The word “Marketing” refers to an activity that is strategically concerned with the management of relationship among an organization and environment. Environment could be described as an internal and external condition to an organization. Internal Environment consists of situational factors that are present within the organizational boundaries whereas external environment consists of any factors or conditions that are not under the control of an organization. Internal Environment creates strengths or weaknesses for a firm, however external environment may create opportunities or threats. Over the past some years, a significant change in external environment has been happened. In

Investor sentiment isn’t a surefire proxy for a deal’s chances of success, and indeed, fewer agreed-upon deals have failed in 2015 than in any year since 1996. There is also sufficient evidence that antitrust regulators are challenging an unusually high number of merger. But investors who bet is called merger arbitrage, has made some high-profile setbacks.

find little evidence of wealth creation, with shareholders of the target firms gaining at the expense of the bidder firms. A merger is said to create value, if the combined value of the bidder or target firm increases on the announcement of the merger (Houston et al., 2001) (Ghosh & Dutta, 2015) (Campa, 2004). Moreover, the synergistic gains hypothesis of corporate acquisitions underlined by Isa & Yap (2004) states that, a combination of two firms will result in a combined gain that is, more than the sum of the value of the individual firm. These gains may be attributed to the increasing efficiencies and synergies of the companies involved.

New companies entering the market, mergers, and globalization, on pricing and the sustainability of profits: Identify the type of merger activity in your

Changes that take place in business, affects changes that take place in the economy, and these changes explain the difference between horizontal, and vertical markets. Importantly, the correlation of change impacts the delivery, perception, and interpretation of markets, this leads to economic impact through competition. Depending on the intent of a company, a vertical market offers a more concentrated and differentiated market through exclusive services or trades, or market industry. More importantly, vertical markets provide a better to concert its efforts into a niche specialty, or small defined market. In theory, the tactics of the vertical market is to analyze and use the commercialization of the internet through portals, search engines,

Careful thinking about what it means for an acquisition to succeed, coupled with an analysis of why deals fail, can lead to some practical advice for managers, thus helping them to develop a more refined view. More specifically, in order for acquisitions to pay off, they ought to pass four tests. I describe the tests below, showing how each offers a way to head off common sources of merger malfunction.

In regards to acquisitions, it is important to distinguish between mergers and acquisitions. In a merger, two companies come together and create a new entity. In an acquisition, one company buys another one and manages it consistent with the acquirer’s needs. An acquisition that involves integration has greater staffing implications than one that involves separation (Rizvi, 2008). A combining of companies is a major change. Mergers and acquisitions represent the end of the gamut of options companies have in combining with each other. It is the mergers and acquisitions that are the combinations that have the greatest implications for size of investment, control, integration requirements, pains of separation, and people management issues

However, in some cases, consensus may not be reached. Then there are different tactics implemented by acquirer firm. Acquirer can make a tender offer. It means that acquirer goes directly to the shareholders of targeted company and buys their shares in return for some premium over the current market price. Before tender offer, there is asymmetric information between parties. Shareholders require a premium because they are informed. Perception to the targeted company in the market changes as fast as possible. We conclude that it is likely to see an overbidding in a hostile merger rather than a friendly merger. The reason is that the acquiring firm may inevitably pay higher premiums in order to gain at least 51% of target firm’s shares and shareholders can be convinced to sell their shares if the target’s management notified them about not to sell.

The list of M&As analysed in this study were extracted from two databases: Bloomberg L.P and Zephyr. The reason for choosing these two sources were the fact that they were the only relevant databases that the researcher had access to. Having two databases gives a more round scope of M&A transactions and the share prices were extracted from Bloomberg L.P as Zephyr do not have any share price information. The criteria of the sample are as follows: the M&A deal was announced between 01/01/2003 and 31/12/2014, the deal to be completed, the acquiring country should be one of the GCC members (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, bahrain, Oman) and finally the acquirer must be a listed company in its country’s stock exchange.

This study aims to evaluate both the short term and long term shareholder wealth effects of the acquiring and target firms. Furthermore, the study will assess the relationship between the actual stock market reactions to mergers and acquisitions (M&As) announcements by examining the merger between First Busey Corporation and Main Street Trust Inc. First Busey Corporation is a financial holding company headquartered in Urbana, Illinois and Busey Bank is its subsidiary. Main Street Trust is a diversified financial services company and the holding company for Main Street Bank & Trust. On 20 September 2006, First Busey Corporation and Main Street Trust Inc. announced that they would come together as a merger of equals. Their agreement states that each Main Street common stock will receive a fixed exchange ratio of 1.55 shares of First Busey common stock. Although it was clear that this event is an acquisition with First Busey as the buyer and Main Street as the target firm, the difference between a “merger” and an “acquisition” has become more and more blur in various aspects. For the purpose of this study, the term merger and acquisition will be used interchangeably.