Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Management takeover battles and the role of the golden handshake

Contents:

Author Info

  • Fabel, Oliver
  • Kolmar, Martin

Abstract

The effect of severance pay on management behavior during a takeover battle is generally ambiguous. Yet, the severance payment completely restraining all influence activities always constitutes a golden handshake. The manager leaving office still benefits from the increase in the merged firm's total value. Moreover, given that the managers are compensated according to an identical linear incentive scheme, the optimal shareholder policy always entails a corner solution. Managers will either receive no severance pay, or the payment will be chosen such that their influence activities equal zero. Relatively strong incentive intensities and low synergy gains then imply that offering no severance pay dominates. --

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/68871/1/685621715.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Konstanz, Department of Economics in its series Discussion Papers, Series 1 with number 319.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:kondp1:319

Contact details of provider:
Postal: D-78457 Konstanz
Phone: +49 7531 88 2314
Fax: +49-7531-88-2145
Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-konstanz.de/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: mergers; contests; golden handshakes;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Denis, David J & Denis, Diane K, 1995. " Performance Changes Following Top Management Dismissals," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-57, September.
  2. Nitzan, Shmuel, 1994. "Modelling rent-seeking contests," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 41-60, May.
  3. Cornu, P. & Isakov, D., 1998. "The Deterring Role of the Medium of Payment in Takeover Contests: Theory and Evidence from the UK," Papers 98.16, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales, Universite de Geneve-.
  4. Herschel I. Grossman, 2000. "The Creation of Effective Property Rights," NBER Working Papers 7897, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Jensen, Michael C & Murphy, Kevin J, 1990. "Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 225-64, April.
  6. Atreya Chakraborty & Richard Arnott, 1997. "Takeover Defenses and Dilution: A Welfare Analysis," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 351., Boston College Department of Economics, revised 06 Oct 2000.
  7. Uma V. Sridharan & Marc R. Reinganum, 1995. "Determinants of the Choice of the Hostile Takeover Mechanism: An Empirical Analysis of Tender Offers and Proxy Contests," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 24(1), Spring.
  8. Choi, Yoon K., 2001. "Management turnover and executive compensation in synergistic takeovers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 223-238.
  9. Marcel Canoy & Yohanes E. Riyanto & Patrick Van Cayseele, 2000. "Corporate takeovers, bargaining and managers' incentives to invest," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 1-18.
  10. Cramton, Peter & Schwartz, Alan, 1991. "Using Auction Theory to Inform Takeover Regulation," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 27-53, Spring.
  11. North, David S., 2001. "The role of managerial incentives in corporate acquisitions: the 1990s evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 125-149, June.
  12. Yermack, David, 1995. "Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 237-269.
  13. Dann, Larry Y. & DeAngelo, Harry, 1988. "Corporate financial policy and corporate control : A study of defensive adjustments in asset and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 87-127, January.
  14. Jack Hirshleifer, 1989. "Conflict and rent-seeking success functions: Ratio vs. difference models of relative success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 101-112, November.
  15. Chowdhry, Bhagwan & Nanda, Vikram, 1993. " The Strategic Role of Debt in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(2), pages 731-45, June.
  16. Burkart, Mike, 1995. " Initial Shareholdings and Overbidding in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1491-1515, December.
  17. Stulz, ReneM., 1988. "Managerial control of voting rights : Financing policies and the market for corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 25-54, January.
  18. Singh, Rajdeep, 1998. "Takeover Bidding with Toeholds: The Case of the Owner's Curse," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(4), pages 679-704.
  19. Paul Bolster & Don Chance & Don Rich, 1996. "Executive Equity Swaps and Corporate Insider Holdings," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 25(2), Summer.
  20. Denis, David J, 1990. " Defensive Changes in Corporate Payout Policy: Share Repurchases and Special Dividends," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(5), pages 1433-56, December.
  21. M. Mark Walker, 2000. "Corporate Takeovers, Strategic Objectives and Acquring Firm Shareholder Wealth," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 29(1), Spring.
  22. William N. Pugh & Sharon L. Oswald & John S. Jahera Jr., 2000. "The effect of ESOP adoptions on corporate performance: are there really performance changes?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 167-180.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:kondp1:319. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.