Acquisition Targets and Motives in the Banking Industry
This paper uses a large sample of individual banking organizations, observed from 1996 to 2005, to investigate the characteristics that made them more likely to be acquired. We use a definition of acquisition that we consider preferable to that used in much of the previous literature, and we employ a competing-risk hazard model that reveals important differences that depend on the type of acquirer. Since interstate acquisitions became more numerous during this period, we also investigate differences in the determinants of acquisition between in-state and out-of-state acquirers. We also employ a subsample of publicly traded banking organizations to investigate the role of managerial ownership in explaining the likelihood of acquisition. The hypothesis that acquisitions serve to transfer resources from less efficient to more efficient uses receives substantial support from our results, as do a number of other relevant hypotheses. Copyright (c) 2009 The Ohio State University No claim to original US government works.
Volume (Year): 41 (2009)
Issue (Month): 6 (09)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2879|
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.:
- Kwangwoo Park & George Pennacchi, 2009.
"Harming Depositors and Helping Borrowers: The Disparate Impact of Bank Consolidation,"
Review of Financial Studies,
Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 1-40, January.
- Kwangwoo Park & George Pennacchi, 2007. "Harming depositors and helping borrowers: the disparate impact of bank consolidation," Working Paper 0704, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
- Aigbe Akhigbe & Jeff Madura & Ann Whyte, 2004. "Partial Anticipation and the Gains to Bank Merger Targets," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 26(1), pages 55-71, August.
- Dean F. Amel & Stephen A. Rhoades, 1989. "Empirical Evidence on the Motives for Bank Mergers," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 17-27, Jan-Mar.
- Rotemberg, Julio J & Saloner, Garth, 1987. "The Relative Rigidity of Monopoly Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 917-926, December.
- Julio J. Rotemberg & Garth Saloner, 1986. "The Relative Rigidity of Monopoly Pricing," NBER Working Papers 1943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Julio Rotemberg & Garth Saloner, 1986. "The Relative Rigidity of Monopoly Pricing," Working papers 414, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- David C. Wheelock & Paul W. Wilson, 2000. "Why do Banks Disappear? The Determinants of U.S. Bank Failures and Acquisitions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 127-138, February.
- David C. Wheelock & Paul W. Wilson, 1995. "Why do banks disappear? The determinants of U.S. bank failures and acquisitions," Working Papers 1995-013, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
- Richard J. Rosen & Scott B. Smart & Chad J. Zutter, 2005. "Why do firms go public? evidence from the banking industry," Working Paper Series WP-05-17, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Robert R. Moore, 1997. "Bank acquisition determinants: implications for small business credit," Financial Industry Studies Working Paper 97-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)