Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Comparison of Two Widely Applied Models of Shareholder Returns in the Context of Takeover Offer Gains for Australian Bidders

A Comparison of Two Widely Applied Models of Shareholder Returns in the Context of Takeover Offer... The impact of different modelling and testing procedures is explored on inferences concerning expected acquisition benefits to bidding shareholders. Two widely accepted return models are examined and found to imply different outcomes for Australian bidding shareholders, despite controlling for potential size- and survivor-related biases and also curbing the influence of extreme observations. A comparison of bidder returns with typical reference portfolio values, via the (0, 1) market model, finds significant wealth gains for bidding shareholders. Those gains evaporate when bidder returns are measured against their own performance standards, via the market model.The choice of return model is not the only decision affecting conclusions. Traditional tests are also examined and found to be unreliable. Conflicting conclusions are reached, under the market model, according to the chosen return measure. The inadequacy of traditional tests is demonstrated and the conflict eliminated when more robust bootstrapping tests are applied. Conclusions are more consistent for traditional tests when the (0, 1) market model is used. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Management SAGE

A Comparison of Two Widely Applied Models of Shareholder Returns in the Context of Takeover Offer Gains for Australian Bidders

Simmonds, David P.
Australian Journal of Management , Volume 28 (1): 39 – Jun 1, 2003
Download PDF
39 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/a-comparison-of-two-widely-applied-models-of-shareholder-returns-in-a3AhVdhW6I
Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0312-8962
eISSN
1327-2020
DOI
10.1177/031289620302800102
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The impact of different modelling and testing procedures is explored on inferences concerning expected acquisition benefits to bidding shareholders. Two widely accepted return models are examined and found to imply different outcomes for Australian bidding shareholders, despite controlling for potential size- and survivor-related biases and also curbing the influence of extreme observations. A comparison of bidder returns with typical reference portfolio values, via the (0, 1) market model, finds significant wealth gains for bidding shareholders. Those gains evaporate when bidder returns are measured against their own performance standards, via the market model.The choice of return model is not the only decision affecting conclusions. Traditional tests are also examined and found to be unreliable. Conflicting conclusions are reached, under the market model, according to the chosen return measure. The inadequacy of traditional tests is demonstrated and the conflict eliminated when more robust bootstrapping tests are applied. Conclusions are more consistent for traditional tests when the (0, 1) market model is used.

Journal

Australian Journal of Management – SAGE

Published: Jun 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.