Location, Proximity, and M&A Transactions

In this paper, we examine how the geographic location of firms affects acquisition decisions and value creation for acquirers in takeover transactions. We find that firms located in an urban area are more likely to receive a takeover bid and complete a takeover transaction as a target than firms located in rural areas, and takeover deals involving an urban target are associated with higher acquirer announcement returns, after controlling for the proximity between the target and the acquirer. In addition, a target's urban location significantly attenuates the negative effect of a long distance between the target and the acquirer on acquirer returns, a fact that is documented in the existing literature. Our findings reveal a previously underexplored force—firm location—that can affect takeover transactions, in addition to proximity. Our paper suggests that a firm's location plays an important role in facilitating the dissemination of soft information and enhancing information-based synergies.

[1]  William L. Megginson,et al.  The Role of Asset Structure, Ownership Structure, and Takeover Defenses in Determining Acquisition Likelihood , 1992, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[2]  Andrei Shleifer,et al.  Do Managerial Objectives Drive Bad Acquisitions? , 1989 .

[3]  Are Busy Boards Detrimental? , 2012 .

[4]  Jun-Koo Kang,et al.  The Geography of Block Acquisitions , 2007 .

[5]  Thomas J. Chemmanur,et al.  What Drives the Valuation Premium in IPOs versus Acquisitions? An Empirical Analysis , 2011 .

[6]  M. Massa,et al.  Investment Banks as Insiders and the Market for Corporate Control , 2007 .

[7]  Corporate Innovation along the Supply Chain , 2015 .

[8]  Cong Wang,et al.  Corporate Governance Transfer and Synergistic Gains from Mergers and Acquisitions , 2009 .

[9]  Ye Cai,et al.  Board Connections and M&A Transactions , 2011 .

[10]  R. Roll,et al.  The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers , 1986 .

[11]  David Stolin,et al.  Returns to Acquirers of Listed and Unlisted Targets , 2004, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[12]  Eric Sorensen,et al.  An application of logit analysis to prediction of merger targets , 1984 .

[13]  O. Faleye,et al.  The Costs of Intense Board Monitoring , 2010 .

[14]  Yongqiang Chu,et al.  Learning from Customers: Corporate Innovation along the Supply Chain , 2014 .

[15]  Saeyoung Chang,et al.  Takeovers of Privately Held Targets, Methods of Payment, and Bidder Returns , 1998 .

[16]  S. Betton,et al.  Chapter 15 – Corporate Takeovers* , 2008 .

[17]  Richard S. Ruback,et al.  Does Corporate Performance Improve after Mergers? , 1990 .

[18]  Ha Hoang,et al.  Network-based research in entrepreneurship A critical review , 2003 .

[19]  Xuan Tian,et al.  The Causes and Consequences of Venture Capital Stage Financing , 2010 .

[20]  B. Sianesi.  An Evaluation of the Swedish System of Active Labor Market Programs in the 1990s , 2004, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[21]  Matthew Rhodes-Kropf,et al.  The Market for Mergers and the Boundaries of the Firm , 2004 .

[22]  R. Coff,et al.  How Buyers Cope with Uncertainty When Acquiring Firms in Knowledge-Intensive Industries: Caveat Emptor , 1999 .

[23]  S. Stouffer.  Intervening opportunities: a theory relating mobility and distance , 1940 .

[24]  The Genesis of Home Bias? The Location and Portfolio Choices of Investment Company Start-Ups , 2008, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[25]  Edward I. Altman,et al.  FINANCIAL RATIOS, DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS AND THE PREDICTION OF CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY , 1968 .

[26]  Z. Ivkovich,et al.  Local Does as Local is: Information Content of the Geography of Individual Investors&Apos; Common Stock Investments , 2003 .

[27]  Jeffrey L. Coles,et al.  Boards: Does One Size Fit All? , 2005 .

[28]  W. Mikkelson,et al.  Managers' voting rights and corporate control , 1989 .

[29]  M. Petersen,et al.  Information: Hard and Soft , 2018, The Review of Corporate Finance Studies.

[30]  Christopher J. Malloy,et al.  The Geography of Equity Analysis , 2003 .

[31]  Vinay B. Nair,et al.  Bank Debt and Corporate Governance , 2009 .

[32]  Kose John,et al.  Takeovers and the Cross-Section of Returns , 2007 .

[33]  D. Stevens,et al.  Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis March 1973 FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MERGED FIRMS: A MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS , 2009 .

[34]  M. Petersen,et al.  Does Distance Still Matter? The Information Revolution in Small Business Lending , 2000 .

[35]  Tim Loughran,et al.  Liquidity: Urban Versus Rural Firms , 2004 .

[36]  B. Eckbo,et al.  Corporate Takeovers , 2008 .

[37]  A. Shleifer,et al.  Large Shareholders and Corporate Control , 1986, Journal of Political Economy.

[38]  J. Stock,et al.  Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments , 1994 .

[39]  Kose John,et al.  Does Geography Matter? Firm Location and Corporate Payout Policy , 2011 .

[40]  Zinat S. Alam,et al.  Does the Location of Directors Matter? Information Acquisition and Board Decisions , 2011, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[41]  Eliezer M. Fich,et al.  Are Busy Boards Effective Monitors? , 2004 .

[42]  Olav Sorenson,et al.  Home sweet home: Social capital and location choice , 2007 .

[43]  Tim Loughran.  The Impact of Firm Location on Equity Issuance , 2008 .

[44]  René M. Stulz,et al.  Firm size and the gains from acquisitions , 2004 .

[45]  S. Titman,et al.  Financial Structure, Acquisition Opportunities, and Firm Locations , 2009 .

[46]  William R. King,et al.  OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS January 1973 SECURITY OPTION STRATEGY UNDER RISK AVERSION : AN ANALYSIS , 2009 .

[47]  X. Tian,et al.  Accessibility and Materialization of Firm Innovation , 2017 .

[48]  Alma Cohen,et al.  What Matters in Corporate Governance? , 2004 .

[49]  Oliver Levine.  Acquiring Growth , 2017 .

[50]  René M. Stulz,et al.  Do Local Analysts Know More? A Cross-Country Study of the Performance of Local Analysts and Foreign Analysts , 2005 .

[51]  Jeffry Netter,et al.  What do returns to acquiring firms tell us? Evidence from firms that make many acquisitions , 2002 .

[52]  Nathan Miller,et al.  Does Function Follow Organizational Form? Evidence from the Lending Practices of Large and Small Banks , 2002 .

[53]  Ronald W. Masulis,et al.  Corporate Governance and Acquirer Returns , 2007 .

[54]  Scott E. Yonker.  Geography and the Market for CEOs , 2015, Manag. Sci..

[55]  Tobias J. Moskowitz,et al.  Home Bias at Home: Local Equity Preference in Domestic Portfolios , 1999 .

[56]  J. Parwada.  The Genesis of Home Bias? The Location and Portfolio Choices of Investment Company Start-Ups , 2005, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[57]  Geography and the Market for CEOs , 2015 .

[58]  Krishna G. Palepu,et al.  Predicting takeover targets: A methodological and empirical analysis , 1986 .

[59]  B. Eckbo.  Corporate Takeovers and Economic Efficiency , 2013 .

[60]  Laura Casares Field,et al.  Are Busy Boards Detrimental? , 2012 .

[61]  G. William Schwert,et al.  Markup Pricing in Mergers and Acquisitions , 1996 .

[62]  Paul A. Gompers,et al.  CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND EQUITY PRICES , 2002 .

[63]  Karol Jan Borowiecki,et al.  Geographic Clustering and Productivity: An Instrumental Variable Approach for Classical Composers , 2011 .

[64]  Simi Kedia,et al.  Geography and Acquirer Returns , 2005 .

[65]  S. Ravid,et al.  The Geography of Venture Capital Contracts , 2009 .

[66]  Allen N. Berger,et al.  Does Function Follow Organizational Form? Evidence from the Lending Practices of Large and Small Banks , 2002 .

[67]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers , 1999 .

[68]  Ning Jia,et al.  Accessibility and Materialization of Firm Innovation , 2017 .

[69]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[70]  René M. Stulz,et al.  Do Local Analysts Know More? A Cross-Country Study of the Performance of Local Analysts and Foreign Analysts , 2005 .

[71]  Daniela Damian,et al.  Does distance still matter , 2008 .