One size does not fit all: Selling firms to private equity versus strategic acquirers
AbstractThis paper investigates the selling process of firms acquired by private equity versus strategic buyers. In a single regression setup we show that selling firms choose between formal auctions, controlled sales and private negotiations to fit their firm and deal characteristics including profitability, R&D, deal initiation and type of the eventual acquirer (private equity or strategic buyer). At the same time, a regression model determining the buyer type shows that private equity buyers pursue targets that have more tangible assets, lower market-to-book ratios and lower research and development expenses relative to targets bought by strategic buyers. To reflect possible interdependencies between these two choices and their impact on takeover premium, as a last step, we estimate a simultaneous model that includes the selling mechanism choice, buyer type and premium equations. Our results show that the primary decision within the whole selling process is the target firm's decision concerning whether to sell the firm in an auction, controlled sale or negotiation which then affects the buyer type. These two decisions seem to be optimal as then they do not impact premium.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Corporate Finance.
Volume (Year): 18 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jcorpfin
Private equity; Takeover premium; Auctions;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
- G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Boone, Audra L. & Mulherin, J. Harold, 2011. "Do private equity consortiums facilitate collusion in takeover bidding?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 1475-1495.
- Audra L. Boone & J. Harold Mulherin, 2007. "How Are Firms Sold?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(2), pages 847-875, 04.
- Bargeron, Leonce & Schlingemann, Frederick & Stulz, Rene & Zutter, Chad, 2007.
"Why Do Private Acquirers Pay So Little Compared to Public Acquirers?,"
Working Paper Series
2007-8, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
- Bargeron, Leonce L. & Schlingemann, Frederik P. & Stulz, René M. & Zutter, Chad J., 2008. "Why do private acquirers pay so little compared to public acquirers?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 375-390, September.
- Leonce Bargeron & Frederik Schlingemann & Rene M. Stulz & Chad Zutter, 2007. "Why Do Private Acquirers Pay So Little Compared to Public Acquirers?," NBER Working Papers 13061, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009.
"Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1544-75, September.
- Paul Klemperer & Jeremy Bulow, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," Economics Series Working Papers 2009-W05, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," Economics Papers 2009-W05, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Bulow, Jeremy I. & Klemperer, Paul, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," CEPR Discussion Papers 7411, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Cumming, Douglas & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2007. "Private equity, leveraged buyouts and governance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 439-460, September.
- French, Kenneth R & McCormick, Robert E, 1984. "Sealed Bids, Sunk Costs, and the Process of Competition," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(4), pages 417-41, October.
- Officer, Micah S. & Ozbas, Oguzhan & Sensoy, Berk A., 2010. "Club deals in leveraged buyouts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 214-240, November.
- Lehn, Kenneth & Poulsen, Annette, 1989. " Free Cash Flow and Stockholder Gains in Going Private Transactions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 44(3), pages 771-87, July.
- Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1992. " Liquidation Values and Debt Capacity: A Market Equilibrium Approach," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1343-66, September.
- Paul Povel & Rajdeep Singh, 2006. "Takeover Contests with Asymmetric Bidders," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 1399-1431.
- Lehn, Kenneth & Netter, Jeffry & Poulsen, Annette, 1990. "Consolidating corporate control*1: Dual-class recapitalizations versus leveraged buyouts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 557-580, October.
- Schlingemann, Frederik P. & Stulz, Rene M. & Walkling, Ralph A., 2002. "Divestitures and the liquidity of the market for corporate assets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 117-144, April.
- Robert Comment & G. William Schwert, 1993.
"Poison or Placebo? Evidence on the Deterrent and Wealth Effects of Modern Antitakeover Measures,"
NBER Working Papers
4316, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Comment, Robert & Schwert, G. William, 1995. "Poison or placebo? Evidence on the deterrence and wealth effects of modern antitakeover measures," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 3-43, September.
- Aktas, Nihat & de Bodt, Eric & Roll, Richard, 2010. "Negotiations under the threat of an auction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 241-255, November.
- Stulz, Rene M & Walkling, Ralph A & Song, Moon H, 1990. " The Distribution of Target Ownership and the Division of Gains in Successful Takeovers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(3), pages 817-33, July.
- Greenwood, Robin & Schor, Michael, 2009. "Investor activism and takeovers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 362-375, June.
- Tomas Jandik & Anil K. Makhija, 2005. "Leverage and the Complexity of Takeovers," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 40(1), pages 95-112, 02.
- Boone, Audra L. & Harold Mulherin, J., 2008. "Do auctions induce a winner's curse? New evidence from the corporate takeover market," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 1-19, July.
- Lucian Bebchuk & Alma Cohen & Allen Ferrell, 2002. "Does the Evidence Favor State Competition in Corporate Law?," NBER Working Papers 9380, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hansen, Robert G, 2001. "Auctions of Companies," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(1), pages 30-43, January.
- Audra L. Boone & J. Harold Mulherin, 2009. "Is There One Best Way to Sell a Company? Auctions Versus Negotiations and Controlled Sales-super-1," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 21(3), pages 28-37.
- Patricia Crifo & Vanina Forget & Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "The price of unsustainability: An experiment with professional private equity investors," Working Papers hal-00757203, HAL.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.