Abstract
This paper uses a methodology robust to recent criticisms of standard long-horizon event study tests to show that bidders in mergers underperform while bidders in tender offers overperform in the three years after the acquisition. However, the long-term underperformance of acquiring firms in mergers is predominantly caused by the poor post-acquisition performance of low book-to-market “glamour” firms. We interpret this finding as evidence that both the market and the management overextrapolate the bidder's past performance (as reflected in the bidder's book-to-market ratio) when they assess the desirability of an acquisition.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
