Board classification and managerial entrenchment: Evidence from the market for corporate control
This paper considers the relation between board classification, takeover activity, and transaction outcomes for a panel of firms between 1990 and 2002. Target board classification does not change the likelihood that a firm, once targeted, is ultimately acquired. Moreover, shareholders of targets with a classified board realize bid returns that are equivalent to those of targets with a single class of directors, but receive a higher proportion of total bid surplus. Board classification does reduce the likelihood of receiving a takeover bid, however, the economic effect of bid deterrence on the value of the firm is quite small. Overall, the evidence is inconsistent with the conventional wisdom that board classification is an anti-takeover device that facilitates managerial entrenchment.
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.
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.:
- 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.
- Stein, Jeremy C, 1988.
"Takeover Threats and Managerial Myopia,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(1), pages 61-80, February.
- Ronald W. Masulis & Cong Wang & Fei Xie, 2007. "Corporate Governance and Acquirer Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(4), pages 1851-1889, 08.
- Malatesta, Paul H., 1983. "The wealth effect of merger activity and the objective functions of merging firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 155-181, April.
- Bates, Thomas W. & Lemmon, Michael L. & Linck, James S., 2006. "Shareholder wealth effects and bid negotiation in freeze-out deals: Are minority shareholders left out in the cold?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 681-708, September.
- Klock, Mark S. & Mansi, Sattar A. & Maxwell, William F., 2005. "Does Corporate Governance Matter to Bondholders?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(04), pages 693-719, December.
- Faleye, Olubunmi, 2007. "Classified boards, firm value, and managerial entrenchment," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 501-529, February.
- Lucian Bebchuk & Alma Cohen, 2004.
"The Costs of Entrenched Boards,"
NBER Working Papers
10587, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lucian Bebchuk, . "The Costs of Entrenched Boards," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1091, American Law & Economics Association.
- Julie Wulf, 2004. "Do CEOs in Mergers Trade Power for Premium? Evidence from "Mergers of Equals"," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 60-101, April.
- Randall A. Heron & Erik Lie, 2006. "On the Use of Poison Pills and Defensive Payouts by Takeover Targets," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(4), pages 1783-1808, July.
- Mary M. Bange, 2004. "Board Composition, Board Effectiveness, and the Observed Form of Takeover Bids," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 1185-1215.
- Laura Casares Field & Jonathan M. Karpoff, 2002. "Takeover Defenses of IPO Firms," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(5), pages 1857-1889, October.
- G. William Schwert, 1999.
"Hostility in Takeovers: In the Eyes of the Beholder?,"
NBER Working Papers
7085, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- G. William Schwert, 2000. "Hostility in Takeovers: In the Eyes of the Beholder?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(6), pages 2599-2640, December.
- Daines, Robert & Klausner, Michael, 2001. "Do IPO Charters Maximize Firm Value? Antitakeover Protection in IPOs," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 83-120, April.
- Ambrose, Brent W. & Megginson, William L., 1992. "The Role of Asset Structure, Ownership Structure, and Takeover Defenses in Determining Acquisition Likelihood," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(04), pages 575-589, December.
- Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
- Pound, John, 1987. "The Effects of Antitakeover Amendments on Takeover Activity: Some Direct Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 353-67, October.
- Palepu, Krishna G., 1986. "Predicting takeover targets : A methodological and empirical analysis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 3-35, March.
- David Yermack, 2004. "Remuneration, Retention, and Reputation Incentives for Outside Directors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(5), pages 2281-2308, October.
- Bates, Thomas W. & Lemmon, Michael L., 2003. "Breaking up is hard to do? An analysis of termination fee provisions and merger outcomes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 469-504, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfinec:v:87:y:2008:i:3:p:656-677. 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.