IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Heterogeneity effects from market interventions

  • Nihat Aktas
  • Eric de Bodt
  • Michel Levasseur
Registered author(s):

    The aim of this paper is to test whether the European Commission activities generate a heterogeneity effect on the merging parties. A sample of 74 firms involved in 45 contested merger and acquisition operations during the years 1990 to 1999 is used. The methodology is based on the GARCH framework. The main result is that, globally, the DGC interventions seem not to reduce significantly the heterogeneity among investors, except for the operations where it takes strong decisions like prohibition. In these last cases, the signal coming from the DGC encompasses valuable information and is well understood by market participants.

    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.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1351847032000166922
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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 Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal The European Journal of Finance.

    Volume (Year): 10 (2004)
    Issue (Month): 5 ()
    Pages: 412-436

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:eurjfi:v:10:y:2004:i:5:p:412-436
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJF20

    Order Information: Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REJF20

    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. Jensen, Michael C. & Ruback, Richard S., 1983. "The market for corporate control : The scientific evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 5-50, April.
    2. Mitchell, Mark L & Mulherin, J Harold, 1994. " The Impact of Public Information on the Stock Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(3), pages 923-50, July.
    3. Bradley, Michael & Desai, Anand & Kim, E. Han, 1988. "Synergistic gains from corporate acquisitions and their division between the stockholders of target and acquiring firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 3-40, May.
    4. Aktas, Nihat & de Bodt, Eric & Roll, Richard, 2004. "Market Response to European Regulation of Business Combinations," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(04), pages 731-757, December.
    5. Lawrence R. Glosten & Ravi Jagannathan & David E. Runkle, 1993. "On the relation between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess return on stocks," Staff Report 157, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    6. Geert Bekaert & Campbell R. Harvey, 1995. "Emerging Equity Market Volatility," NBER Working Papers 5307, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. French, Kenneth R. & Roll, Richard, 1986. "Stock return variances : The arrival of information and the reaction of traders," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 5-26, September.
    8. Malkiel, Burton & Campbell, John & Lettau, Martin & Xu, Yexiao, 2001. "Have Individual Stocks Become More Volatile? An Empirical Exploration of Idiosyncratic Risk," Scholarly Articles 3128707, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    9. Bessembinder, Hendrik & Chan, Kalok & Seguin, Paul J., 1996. "An empirical examination of information, differences of opinion, and trading activity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 105-134, January.
    10. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1993. "Differences of Opinion Make a Horse Race," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(3), pages 473-506.
    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:taf:eurjfi:v:10:y:2004:i:5:p:412-436. 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: (Michael McNulty)

    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.