IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/kondp1/319.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Management takeover battles and the role of the golden handshake

Author

Listed:
  • Fabel, Oliver
  • Kolmar, Martin

Abstract

The effect of severance pay on management behavior during a takeover battle is generally ambiguous. Yet, the severance payment completely restraining all influence activities always constitutes a golden handshake. The manager leaving office still benefits from the increase in the merged firm's total value. Moreover, given that the managers are compensated according to an identical linear incentive scheme, the optimal shareholder policy always entails a corner solution. Managers will either receive no severance pay, or the payment will be chosen such that their influence activities equal zero. Relatively strong incentive intensities and low synergy gains then imply that offering no severance pay dominates.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabel, Oliver & Kolmar, Martin, 2002. "Management takeover battles and the role of the golden handshake," Discussion Papers, Series I 319, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:kondp1:319
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/68871/1/685621715.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Cornu & Dušan Isakov*, 2000. "The Deterring Role of the Medium of Payment in Takeover Contests: Theory and Evidence from the UK," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 6(4), pages 423-440, December.
    2. Singh, Rajdeep, 1998. "Takeover Bidding with Toeholds: The Case of the Owner's Curse," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(4), pages 679-704.
    3. Burkart, Mike, 1995. "Initial Shareholdings and Overbidding in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1491-1515, December.
    4. Herschel I. Grossman, 2001. "The Creation of Effective Property Rights," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 347-352, May.
    5. Dann, Larry Y. & DeAngelo, Harry, 1988. "Corporate financial policy and corporate control : A study of defensive adjustments in asset and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 87-127, January.
    6. Uma V. Sridharan & Marc R. Reinganum, 1995. "Determinants of the Choice of the Hostile Takeover Mechanism: An Empirical Analysis of Tender Offers and Proxy Contests," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 24(1), Spring.
    7. Denis, David J, 1990. "Defensive Changes in Corporate Payout Policy: Share Repurchases and Special Dividends," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(5), pages 1433-1456, December.
    8. Cramton, Peter & Schwartz, Alan, 1991. "Using Auction Theory to Inform Takeover Regulation," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 27-53, Spring.
    9. Chakraborty, Atreya & Arnott, Richard, 2001. "Takeover Defenses and Dilution: A Welfare Analysis," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 311-334, September.
    10. Yermack, David, 1995. "Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 237-269.
    11. Chowdhry, Bhagwan & Nanda, Vikram, 1993. "The Strategic Role of Debt in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(2), pages 731-745, June.
    12. Marcel Canoy & Yohanes E. Riyanto & Patrick Van Cayseele, 2000. "Corporate takeovers, bargaining and managers' incentives to invest," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 1-18.
    13. Choi, Yoon K., 2001. "Management turnover and executive compensation in synergistic takeovers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 223-238.
    14. M. Mark Walker, 2000. "Corporate Takeovers, Strategic Objectives and Acquring Firm Shareholder Wealth," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 29(1), Spring.
    15. Don Goldstein, 2000. "Hostile Takeovers as Corporate Governance? Evidence from the 1980s," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 381-402.
    16. William N. Pugh & Sharon L. Oswald & John S. Jahera Jr., 2000. "The effect of ESOP adoptions on corporate performance: are there really performance changes?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 167-180.
    17. 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.
    18. Paul Bolster & Don Chance & Don Rich, 1996. "Executive Equity Swaps and Corporate Insider Holdings," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 25(2), Summer.
    19. North, David S., 2001. "The role of managerial incentives in corporate acquisitions: the 1990s evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 125-149, June.
    20. Michael C. Jensen & Kevin J. Murphy, 2010. "CEO Incentives—It's Not How Much You Pay, But How," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 64-76, January.
    21. Jensen, Michael C & Murphy, Kevin J, 1990. "Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 225-264, April.
    22. Denis, David J & Denis, Diane K, 1995. "Performance Changes Following Top Management Dismissals," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1057, September.
    23. Jack Hirshleifer, 1989. "Conflict and rent-seeking success functions: Ratio vs. difference models of relative success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 101-112, November.
    24. Denis, David J. & Serrano, Jan M., 1996. "Active investors and management turnover following unsuccessful control contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 239-266, February.
    25. Nitzan, Shmuel, 1994. "Modelling rent-seeking contests," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 41-60, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oliver Fabel & Martin Kolmar, 2007. "On 'Golden Parachutes' as Manager Discipline," TWI Research Paper Series 17, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    2. Goldman, Eitan & Qian, Jun, 2005. "Optimal toeholds in takeover contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 321-346, August.
    3. Martynova, M., 2006. "The market for corporate control and corporate governance regulation in Europe," Other publications TiSEM 8651e281-4914-41f2-ac14-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Chakraborty, Atreya & Arnott, Richard, 2001. "Takeover Defenses and Dilution: A Welfare Analysis," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 311-334, September.
    5. Dai, Yun & Gryglewicz, Sebastian & Smit, Han T.J. & De Maeseneire, Wouter, 2013. "Similar bidders in takeover contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 544-561.
    6. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2485-2563 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Paul André, 2009. "Discussion of Firm Performance and Managerial Succession in Family Managed Firms," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3‐4), pages 485-495, April.
    8. Denis, David J. & Serrano, Jan M., 1996. "Active investors and management turnover following unsuccessful control contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 239-266, February.
    9. Iván Marinovic, 2017. "Delegated Bidding and the Allocative Effect of Accounting Rules," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(7), pages 2181-2196, July.
    10. Mikkelson, Wayne H. & Partch, M. Megan, 1997. "The decline of takeovers and disciplinary managerial turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 205-228, May.
    11. Mike Burkart & Denis Gromb & Fausto Panunzi, 2006. "Minority Blocks and Takeover Premia," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 162(1), pages 32-49, March.
    12. David Ettinger, 2009. "Takeover Contests, Toeholds and Deterrence," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(1), pages 103-124, March.
    13. Borochin, Paul & Knopf, John D., 2021. "Do managers seek control and entrenchment?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    14. Mike Burkart & Samuel Lee, 2008. "One Share - One Vote: the Theory," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-49.
    15. Bris, Arturo, 2002. "Toeholds, takeover premium, and the probability of being acquired," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 227-253, July.
    16. Baixiao Liu, 2016. "The Disciplinary Role Of Failed Takeover Attempts," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 39(1), pages 63-85, March.
    17. Singh, Rajdeep, 1998. "Takeover Bidding with Toeholds: The Case of the Owner's Curse," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(4), pages 679-704.
    18. Ahern, Kenneth R., 2012. "Bargaining power and industry dependence in mergers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 530-550.
    19. Denis, David J. & Kruse, Timothy A., 2000. "Managerial discipline and corporate restructuring following performance declines," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 391-424, March.
    20. Daniel Ferreira & Emanuel Ornelas & John L. Turner, 2005. "Ownership Structure and the Market for Corporate Control," IBMEC RJ Economics Discussion Papers 2005-09, Economics Research Group, IBMEC Business School - Rio de Janeiro.
    21. Bos, Dieter & Kolmar, Martin, 2003. "Anarchy, efficiency, and redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(11), pages 2431-2457, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    mergers; contests; golden handshakes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation

    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:zbw:kondp1:319. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwkonde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.