Motives for partial acquisition: Evidence from the effects of CEO change on the performance of partially acquired U.S. target firms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A company may acquire shares in another corporation to discipline the target management and improve target performance, or to gain inter-corporate perquisites such as higher dividends and favorable business deals to the detriment of the other shareholders of the target firm. We investigate the change in the post-acquisition share and operating performance, the dividend policy, the liquidity, and growth prospects of U.S. firms whose shares were partially acquired by other corporations during 1995-2000, wherein the target firms remained independent publicly traded companies following the acquisition. Using a change in CEO post acquisition as a proxy for the extent to which the acquirer wishes to change the direction of the target management, we find that target firms where the CEO was retained show negative risk adjusted abnormal share returns and significant deterioration in operating performance after the acquisition while having a substantial increase in CEO compensation compared to those target firms that replace their CEO during the post acquisition period. This suggests that disciplinary motives may predominate where the acquisition leads to a change in CEO, while obtaining inter-corporate perquisites may be the motivation in acquisitions that do not lead to replacement of the target firm CEO. We do not find support for financial perquisites such as higher dividends that are subject to inter-corporate exclusion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it