The certification hypothesis of fairness opinions for acquiring firms
We study the certification role of fairness opinions in corporate transactions in a simple non-cooperative setting with asymmetric information and possibly misaligned managerial incentives, and discuss the effect of different regulatory scenarios. Specifically, we compare three settings: one in which no third-party fairness opinion is available, one in which the management is required to obtain a fairness opinion before any transaction, and one in which the management’s decision to require a fairness opinion is voluntary. We compare shareholder value in each of the three scenarios and discuss implications for the optimal design of regulatory environments for fairness opinions.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 31 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle|
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.:
- Kisgen, Darren J. & "QJ" Qian, Jun & Song, Weihong, 2009. "Are fairness opinions fair? The case of mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 179-207, February.
- La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1998.
"Law and Finance,"
3451310, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1996. "Law and Finance," NBER Working Papers 5661, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rafael LaPorta & Florencio Lopez de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1996. "Law and Finance," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1768, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Rafael LaPorta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, "undated". "Law and Finance," Working Paper 19451, Harvard University OpenScholar.
- Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 1994.
"What do firms do with cash windfalls?,"
Journal of Financial Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 337-360, December.
- Matthew D. Cain & David J. Denis, 2010. "Do Fairness Opinion Valuations Contain Useful Information?," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1244, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Joseph R.A Ayee, 2005. "Working Paper 82 - Public Sector Management in Africa," Working Paper Series 217, African Development Bank.
- Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-329, May.
- Makhija, Anil K. & Narayanan, Rajesh P., 2007. "Fairness Opinions in Mergers and Acquisitions," Working Paper Series 2007-11, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
- Yasuhiro Ohta & Kenton K. Yee, 2008. "The Fairness Opinion Puzzle: Board Incentives, Information Asymmetry, and Bidding Strategy," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 229-272, 01.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:31:y:2011:i:4:p:240-248. 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.