IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sef/csefwp/353.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Entry by Takeover: Auctions vs. Negotiations

Author

Listed:

Abstract

We compare two mechanisms through which a potential entrant can take over an incumbent in a market with asymmetric firms: auctions (where other incumbents can bid for the target) and bilateral negotiations between the entrant and the target. The entrant’s choice of target depends on the mechanism, and it may not maximize ex-post profit or consumer welfare. In an auction, the entrant pays a higher price to take over a target with higher synergies, because they impose stronger negative externalities on incumbents and increase their willingness to pay for preventing entry. This provides a new rationale for takeover premia. Auctions increase the price obtained by the target, but reduce welfare compared to negotiation because they may discourage the entrant from acquiring a target with higher synergies.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Pagnozzi & Antonio Rosato, 2014. "Entry by Takeover: Auctions vs. Negotiations," CSEF Working Papers 353, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
  • Handle: RePEc:sef:csefwp:353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.csef.it/WP/wp353.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Inderst, Roman & Wey, Christian, 2004. "The incentives for takeover in oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1067-1089, November.
    2. Yeon-Koo Che & Tracy R. Lewis, 2007. "The role of lockups in takeover contests," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(3), pages 648-669, September.
    3. Ding, Wei & Fan, Cuihong & Wolfstetter, Elmar G., 2013. "Horizontal mergers with synergies: Cash vs. profit-share auctions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 382-391.
    4. Mehmet Ekmekci & Nenad Kos & Rakesh Vohra, 2016. "Just Enough or All: Selling a Firm," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 223-256, August.
    5. Fishman, Michael J, 1989. " Preemptive Bidding and the Role of the Medium of Exchange in Acquisitions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 44(1), pages 41-57, March.
    6. Whinston, Michael D., 2007. "Antitrust Policy toward Horizontal Mergers," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier.
    7. Funk, Peter, 1996. "Auctions with Interdependent Valuations," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 25(1), pages 51-64.
    8. 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.
    9. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof, 2007. "A Consumer Surplus Defense in Merger Control," Working Paper Series 686, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    10. Eckbo, B Espen & Giammarino, Ronald M & Heinkel, Robert L, 1990. "Asymmetric Information and the Medium of Exchange in Takeovers: Theory and Tests," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 3(4), pages 651-675.
    11. Cramton, Peter & Schwartz, Alan, 1991. "Using Auction Theory to Inform Takeover Regulation," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 27-53, Spring.
    12. Mehmet Ekmekci & Nenad Kos, 2016. "Information in Tender Offers With a Large Shareholder," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 87-139, January.
    13. Michael J. Fishman, 1988. "A Theory of Preemptive Takeover Bidding," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(1), pages 88-101, Spring.
    14. 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.
    15. Sandro Brusco & Giuseppe Lopomo & David T. Robinson & S. Viswanathan, 2007. "Efficient Mechanisms For Mergers And Acquisitions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(3), pages 995-1035, August.
    16. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M, 1992. "Alternative Entry Paths: The Build or Buy Decision," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 129-150, Spring.
    17. Roll, Richard, 1986. "The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(2), pages 197-216, April.
    18. Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2000. "Auctions with Downstream Interaction Among Buyers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 768-791, Winter.
    19. Sven-Olof Fridolfsson & Johan Stennek, 2005. "Why Mergers Reduce Profits And Raise Share Prices-A Theory Of Preemptive Mergers," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(5), pages 1083-1104, September.
    20. 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.
    21. Gautam Gowrisankaran & Thomas J. Holmes, 2004. "Mergers and the Evolution of Industry Concentration: Results from the Dominant-Firm Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 561-582, Autumn.
    22. Larry D. Qiu & Wen Zhou, 2007. "Merger waves: a model of endogenous mergers," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(1), pages 214-226, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Herweg, Fabian & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2014. "Auctions vs. Negotiations:The Effects of Inefficient Renegotiation," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 484, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    2. Onur A. Koska & Ilke Onur & Frank Stähler, 2015. "The Scope of Auctions in the Presence of Downstream Interactions and Information Externalities," CESifo Working Paper Series 5256, CESifo Group Munich.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Takeover; Mergers; Auctions with Externalities;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sef:csefwp:353. 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: (Lia Ambrosio). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cssalit.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.