MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402815990 · doi:10.15678/eber.2024.120301

Acquisitions of private-equity-backed private companies: Insights from acquirer’s choice of target and the implications on deal value through the subprime crisis

2024· article· en· W4402815990 on OpenAlexaff
Josephine Gemson

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurial Business and Economics Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivate equitySubprime crisisBusinessPrivate equity firmValue (mathematics)Financial systemEquity (law)Financial crisisValue creationFinanceEconomicsCommerceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study explores the characteristics of worldwide acquisitions of private-equity-backed (PE) private companies. It examines the impact of the subprime crisis, the acquirer’s choice of target, and the implications on deal value. Research Design & Methods: This study uses deal-level data on worldwide PE-backed private company acquisitions that were completed between 2000 and 2017. Research methods to test the hypotheses include data visualization, comparative analysis, and regression analysis. Findings: Data visualization indicates that North America was the most popular region for PE-backed private company acquisitions, followed by Europe and Asia. Industry sectors such as the services sector, the technology sector, the manufacturing sector, and the healthcare, and biotechnology sectors were popular. Comparative analysis indicates that financial acquirers preferred targets with larger revenues, larger core profits and operational profitability. Regression analysis indicates that acquirer characteristics such as acquirer type and experience levels, and deal characteristics such as deal location and percentage of stake acquired influence deal size. However, target company information and performance supersede acquirer characteristics. The subprime crisis in 2008 was a minor deterrent in the acquisition activity for both financial buyers and strategic buyers resulting in larger value deals with targets with smaller revenues. Implications & Recommendations: This study provides insights into the importance and relevance of signals in PE-backed private company acquisitions by examining the characteristics of such acquisitions, the acquirer preferences, and the determinants of deal value. Private companies are less visible and less transparent as compared to public companies, making them obscure and difficult to value. Therefore, strategic acquirers and financial acquirers rely on signals to assess the viability of the potential target, with PE backing serving as a notable certification. This study indicates that PE-backing influences deal value and acquirer’s preferences. Despite the 2008 financial crisis influencing acquisition activity, both sets of acquirers were able to leverage their experiences into their respective acquisitions. Higher total and relevant experience seemed to work favourably for acquirers, who profited from increased bargaining power. Contribution & Value Added: Firstly, this study enriches and adds to the knowledge of the literature on acquisitions, particularly private company acquisitions and the role played by PE in the same. Next, this study adds to the literature on the subprime crisis and the impact of the crisis on acquisition activity. Further, this article provides insights into strategic decision-making by the two dominant acquirers- strategic acquirers, and financial acquirers- when they are limited by a target pool and the interpretation of signals by the target. Finally, the examination of PE-backed private company acquisitions adds to the study and practice of entrepreneurial finance by examining the role of PE as a signal to deal with quality to encourage acquisitions of privately held targets.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrepreneurial Business and Economics ReviewSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207