IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

MicroHoo: Deal failure, industry rivalry, and sources of overbidding

  • Aktas, Nihat
  • de Bodt, Eric
  • Roll, Richard
Registered author(s):

    On February 1, 2008, Microsoft offered $43.7billion for Yahoo. This offer was a milestone in the battle between Microsoft and Google to control the Internet search industry. The announcement accompanied a substantial decrease in Microsoft's stock price. Investors apparently considered the bid too high and doubted Microsoft's ability to create value with Yahoo's assets (the announcement combined returns implied a total value destruction of $13.29billion). Using the abnormal returns pattern of industry firms and customers, this article examines the sources of overbidding. Our analyses indicate that Microsoft's aggressive move is rooted in its rivalry with Google, but the personality traits of the involved CEOs might explain also a portion of the overbidding.

    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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119912000983
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Corporate Finance.

    Volume (Year): 19 (2013)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 20-35

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:19:y:2013:i:c:p:20-35
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jcorpfin

    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. Christa H. S. Bouwman & Kathleen Fuller & Amrita S. Nain, 2009. "Market Valuation and Acquisition Quality: Empirical Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 633-679, February.
    2. Ulrike Malmendier & Geoffrey Tate, 2004. "Who Makes Acquisitions? CEO Overconfidence and the Market's Reaction," NBER Working Papers 10813, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. McCardle, Kevin F & Viswanathan, S, 1994. "The Direct Entry versus Takeover Decision and Stock Price Performance around Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(1), pages 1-43, January.
    4. Akdogu, Evrim, 2009. "Gaining a competitive edge through acquisitions: Evidence from the telecommunications industry," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 99-112, February.
    5. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-29, May.
    6. Schwert, G. William, 1996. "Markup pricing in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 153-192, June.
    7. Becher, David A. & Mulherin, J. Harold & Walkling, Ralph A., 2012. "Sources of Gains in Corporate Mergers: Refined Tests from a Neglected Industry," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(01), pages 57-89, April.
    8. Pollock Rufus, 2010. "Is Google the Next Microsoft: Competition, Welfare and Regulation in Online Search," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(4), pages 1-31, December.
    9. Boehmer, Ekkehart & Masumeci, Jim & Poulsen, Annette B., 1991. "Event-study methodology under conditions of event-induced variance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 253-272, December.
    10. David S. Evans, 2009. "The Online Advertising Industry: Economics, Evolution, and Privacy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 37-60, Summer.
    11. Harford, Jarrad, 2005. "What drives merger waves?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 529-560, September.
    12. Bradley, Michael & Desai, Anand & Kim, E. Han, 1983. "The rationale behind interfirm tender offers : Information or synergy?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 183-206, April.
    13. Shahrur, Husayn, 2005. "Industry structure and horizontal takeovers: Analysis of wealth effects on rivals, suppliers, and corporate customers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-98, April.
    14. Eckbo, B. Espen, 1983. "Horizontal mergers, collusion, and stockholder wealth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 241-273, April.
    15. Boyan Jovanovic & Serguey Braguinsky, 2004. "Bidder Discounts and Target Premia in Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 46-56, March.
    16. Ryngaert, Michael & Scholten, Ralph, 2010. "Have changing takeover defense rules and strategies entrenched management and damaged shareholders? The case of defeated takeover bids," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 16-37, February.
    17. Mulherin, J. Harold & Boone, Audra L., 2000. "Comparing acquisitions and divestitures," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 117-139, July.
    18. Fee, C. Edward & Thomas, Shawn, 2004. "Sources of gains in horizontal mergers: evidence from customer, supplier, and rival firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 423-460, December.
    19. DeAngelo, Harry & DeAngelo, Linda, 1989. "Proxy contests and the governance of publicly held corporations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 29-59, June.
    20. Chance, Don M., 2009. "Liquidity and employee options: An empirical examination of the Microsoft experience," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 469-487, September.
    21. Kathleen Fuller & Jeffry Netter & Mike Stegemoller, 2002. "What Do Returns to Acquiring Firms Tell Us? Evidence from Firms That Make Many Acquisitions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(4), pages 1763-1793, 08.
    22. Roll, Richard, 1986. "The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(2), pages 197-216, April.
    23. Hertzel, Michael & Smith, Janet Kiholm & Smith, Richard L, 2001. "Competitive Impact of Strategic Restructuring: Evidence from the Telecommunications Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 207-46, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:corfin:v:19:y:2013:i:c:p:20-35. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.