Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/36860
|
| Title: | 平均數復歸對購併後主併公司績效表現影響之研究-以美國電子電機產業為例 |
| Authors: | 洪浩展 |
| Contributors: | 胡聯國
洪浩展 |
| Keywords: | 購併
平均數復歸
M&A
Mean reversion |
| Date: | 2006 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-18 19:58:13 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究的目的，在於檢視購併案產生後，企業的報酬是否會受到平均數復歸（Mean reversion）的影響，而逐漸回復到產業的平均報酬。並且分析主併公司與被併公司佔雙方總資產比例的高低差異，所受到的不同影響程度。
本次研究的樣本採用1987～2006年中的美國電子電機產業共77件購併案，並依照主併公司佔雙方總資產的比例不同，分成為兩個群集。將兩群集做比較分析。實證結果顯示，兩個群集均有顯著的平均數復歸現象。而主併佔雙方總資產比例較高的群集，在購併第一年即有顯著的優於產業平均報酬，而主併與被併資產相近的群集，則是於第四年開始才有顯著的績效改善。根據實證結果，我們做出以下的結論：
1.企業的報酬具有平均數復歸的特性，表現優良的公司會被他人學習，而使整體產業平均報酬逐漸提升，漸漸蠶食原先與產業平均之間的差距；相反的，表現不佳的公司亦透過學習，逐漸改善自己的績效，也使的整體產業平均報酬上升，最後雙方都將趨向產業的平均水準。
2.當研究者要分析企業遭受偶發性事件（如購併）的影響時，應當考慮平均數復歸的所帶來的效果。如果忽略了平均數復歸所帶來的效果，將會對事件產生的影響給予錯誤的解讀。
3.面對購併績效的研究時，必須移除平均數復歸的負面效果，如此才得以正確估計購併後的績效表現。且此時主併公司資產佔雙方資產比例較高者，於購併第一年就有明顯的績效改善的效果，而雙方資產相近者，則在購併成立後第四年開始才有較佳的績效表現。
The purpose of this research is to look over the return of enterprise can receive influence from mean reversion on post-merger performance. And it analyzes the degree of influence on acquirer companies with different proportion in total assets of both acquirer and target companies.
The sample of this research adopts 77 cases of electronic and electrical equipment industry of U.S.A. in 1987- 200, take according to the proportion of total assets of acquirer company in both total assets of acquirer and target company, divide into two clusters. Make comparative analysis of these two clusters.
According to the empirical results, we make the following conclusions:
1.The return of enterprises has characteristic of mean reversion. Both well performed companies and worse performed companies will move toward the whole industry`s average return.
2.As the researcher wants to analyze the influence of enterprises suffered from the sporadic incident (such as M&A), they should consider the phenomenon of mean reversion. Take off the negative result of the mean reversion in order to estimate correctly for the exactly performance after M&A.
3.The acquirer companies which total assets have a higher proportion in both acquirer and target companies, will have superior to industry average return apparently in first year, and the acquirer companies which total assets close to the target companies, will have apparent improvement in performances until the fourth year. |
| Reference: | 西文部份
1 Agrawal, A. and G. Mandelker(1992),”Large shareholders and the monitoring of managers:The case of antitakeover charter amendments,” Journal of Fianacial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol.25 pp.143-161.
2 Akhavein, J.D., Berger, A.N., Humphrey, D.B., 1997. The effects of megamergers on efficiency and prices:Evidence from a bank profit function. Review of Industrial Organization 12, 95–134.
3 Bacon, F.W., Shin, T.S., and Murphy, N.B.,1994,”Factor Motivating Mergers: The case of Rural Electric Cooperatives’, Journal of Economics and Business, Vol.46,pp.129-134.
4 Banerjee, Ajeyo and E. Woodrow Eckard,1988, “ Are Mega-Mergers Anticompetitive?Evidence from the First Great Merger Wave” Rand Journal of Economics,29(4), pp.803-827
5 Berger, A.N., DeYoung, R., 2002. Technological progress and the geographic expansion of the banking industry. In: Paper Presented at the Eastern Finance Association Meeting, Baltimore, MD.
6 Berger, A.N., Humphrey, D.B., 1992. Megamergers in banking and the use of cost efficiency as an antitrust defense. The Antitrust Bulletin 37, 541–600.
7 Bradford W.D., (1978), “The Performance of Mergers and Savings and Loan Associations”, Journal of Business, 51, No.1, pp.115-123.
8 Caves, Richard, 1989. Takeovers and economic efficiency: foresight vs. hindsight. International Journal of Industrial Organization 7, 151-174.
9 Cooke, T.E (1986), Voluntary disclosure by Swedish companies. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 1(2), pp.1-25
10 Cornett, M.M., Tehranian, H., 1992. Changes in corporate performance associated with bank acquisitions. Journal of Financial Economics 31, 211–234.
11 Craig, B., dos Santos, J.C., 1997. The risk effects of bank acquisitions. The Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, Economic Review, 25–35.
12 DeLong, G.L., 2001. Stockholder gains from focusing versus diversifying bank mergers. Journal of Financial Economics 59, 221–252.
13 DeLong, G.L., 2003. Does long-term performance of mergers match market expectations? Evidence from the U.S. banking industry. Financial Management 35, 5–25.
14 DeLong, G.L., DeYoung, R. 2004. Learning by Observing: Information Spillovers in the Execution and Valuation of Commercial Bank M&As, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Working Paper 2004-17.
15 DeYoung, R., 1998. Management quality and X-inefficiency in national banks. Journal of Financial Services Research 13, 5–22.
16 Fama, E.F., French, K.R., 2000. Forecasting profitability and earnings. Journal of Business 73, 161–175.
17 Fama, E.F., McBeth, J.D., 1973. Risk, return and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy 81,607–636.
18 Healy, P.M., K.G. and R.R., “Does Merger Improve Corporate Performance,” Journal of Financial Economics, March, 1992, pp.135-175.
19 Houston, J.F., James, C.M., Ryngaert, M.D., 2001. Where do merger gains come from? Bank mergers from the perspective of insiders and outsiders. Journal of Financial Economics 60, 285–331.
20 Johnston, J., DiNardo, J., 1997. Econometric Methods, fourth ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
21 Kraus, A., Litzenberger, R., 1976. Skewness preference and the valuation of risk assets. The Journal of Finance 31, 1085–1100.
22 Kwan, S.H. (1997), “Securities Activities by Commercial Banking Firms Section20 Subsidiaries: Risk, Return, and Diversification Benefits,” Federal
Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Working Papers.
23 Lichtenberg, F.R., 1994. Testing the convergence hypothesis. The Review of Economics and Statistics 76 (3), 576–579.
24 Morris Lnapp, Alan Gart’ , Mukesh Chaudhrt, 2006. The impact of mean reversion of bank profitability on post-merger performance in the banking industry, Journal of Banking & Finance 30,3503-3517
25 Peristiani, S., 1997. Do mergers improve the X-efficiency and scale efficiency of U.S. banks? Evidence from the 1980’s. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 29, 326–337.
26 Pilloff, S.J., 1996. Performance changes and stockholder wealth creation associated with mergers of publicly traded banking institutions. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 28, 294–310.
27 Rhoades, S.A., 1994. A Summary of Merger Performance Studies in Banking, 1980–93, and an Assessment of ‘‘Operating Performance’’ and ‘‘Event Study’’ Methodologies, Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Staff Study 167.
28 Walter, I., 2004. Mergers and Acquisitions in Banking and Finance: What Works, What Fails, and Why. Oxford University Press, New York.
中文部份
1. 伍忠賢，『企業購併聖經』，遠流出版股份有限公司，1998年8月。
2. 伍忠賢，『企業購併─理論與實務』台北，新陸書局，2000年3月。
3. 朱新怡（1999），購併型態對股東財富影響之實證研究，東吳大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
4. 李伶珠（1999），中、美兩國企業購併動機差一之理論研究，國立政治大學會計研究所，碩士論文。
5. 吳家昌（2004），產業景氣與購併績效之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
6. 林小娟（2000），公司接管策略─以賽局理論分析，國立政治大學國際貿易研究所，碩士論文。
7. 洪儷文（2000），本國銀行業購併信用合作社之經營績效分析，國立台北大學財政研究所碩士論文。
8. 徐名瑤（2002），銀行轉投資行為、治理機制對經營績效之影響，國立中央大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
9. 陳玉華（2003），金融控股公司的轉投資行為、治理機制對經營績效之影響，國立中央大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
10.陳志光（1990），我國企業購併前後綜效及經營績效之比較研究，國立政治大學會計學研究所未出版之碩士論文。
11.許李瑋（1999），我國銀行業購併之績效與綜效之實證研究，中國文化大學國際企業。
12.陳志賢（1999），商業銀行購併績效之實證研究--多變量因素分析法下之結果，朝陽大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
13.陳淑華（2000），『銀行購併前後之績效評估：台灣金融業之探討』，銘傳大學金融研究所未出版碩士論文。
14.莊耿忠（2004），金融機構購併對經營績效與市場風險關係之研究，朝陽科技大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
15.楊嘉瑜（2001），探討企業併購與策略聯盟對財務績效之影響─以台灣資訊電子產業為例，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
16.歐陽遠芬（1998），銀行的購併與經營績效─規模經濟、範疇經濟與效率之分析，東吳大學經濟研究所碩士論文。
17.蕭守正（2002），企業蓄意接管後對目標公司經營績效之影響─以台灣企業為例之個案研究，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
國際經營與貿易研究所
94351011
95 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0094351011 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
