IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/finrev/v31y1996i1p87-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tender Offers and Target Management Responses: Managerial Entrenchment versus Stockholder Interest Revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Thosar, Satish

Abstract

Defensive actions by managements facing hostile tender offers have generally been interpreted as entrenchment-oriented behavior. In this paper, longitudinal wealth effects on target firm stockholders are examined for the 1978-1985 period. The sample of firms where target management resists the tender offer registers significantly higher post-tender offer announcement gains as compared to the sample of firms where target management remains passive. The evidence appears to support the stockholder interest hypothesis. Copyright 1996 by MIT Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Thosar, Satish, 1996. "Tender Offers and Target Management Responses: Managerial Entrenchment versus Stockholder Interest Revisited," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 31(1), pages 87-104, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:finrev:v:31:y:1996:i:1:p:87-104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pearce II, John A. & Robinson, Richard Jr., 2004. "Hostile takeover defenses that maximize shareholder wealth," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 15-24.
    2. Krishnan Maheswaran & Sean Pinder, 2005. "Australian evidence on the determinants and impact of takeover resistance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 45(4), pages 613-633, December.

    More about this item

    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:bla:finrev:v:31:y:1996:i:1:p:87-104. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/efaaaea.html .

    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.