Abstract

The takeover boom of the 1980s was accompanied by a series of innovations in debt contracts, including the poison put that allows bonds to be redeemed in the event of a corporate control change. The poison put was included in a large majority of convertible debt offerings, shortly after the first issues with such provisions. We attempt to understand the factors that contributed to the widespread adoption of this innovation in convertible bonds and the consequences for shareholder wealth. Our findings suggest that by reducing the potential for bondholder-shareholder conflicts and by conveying positive information about future takeover prospects, poison puts result in significant benefits to issuing firm shareholders, particularly if the firm is under takeover speculation. There are, however, no benefits when a firm has adopted antitakeover measures prior to the offering. There is weaker evidence that existing bondholders do worse when poison puts are present.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.