The major question this study examines is whether international acquisitions show different patterns of returns to participating firms than purely domestic events do. The research design holds the time period and sample constant, focusing on the measurement of returns using two models and three estimation periods. The models are a domestic market model (DMM) and an international market model (IMM). The estimation periods are a pre-event, pooled pre and post-event, and separate post-event period. / The sample is composed of 73 acquisitions occurring from 1970 to 1980, involving cash payment. Thirty-five acquisitions represent U.S. firms acquiring U.K. firms, and 38 events represent U.K. firms acquiring U.S. firms. Returns to the firms are measured for a $\pm$36 month period around the first acquisition announcement date. / Eight null hypotheses are used as benchmarks of performance. Hypotheses one and two state that acquired firm returns using pre-event estimation and the DMM and IMM, respectively, are not significantly greater than zero. Hypotheses one and two are rejected for U.S. and U.K. acquired firms since excess returns are significantly positive based on both the pre-event DMM and IMM. / Hypotheses three through five state that returns to U.S. (U.K.) acquiring firms under the DMM for pre, pooled, and post-event estimation, respectively, are not significantly different from zero. Hypothesis three cannot be rejected (accepted) around the event date (following the event date) because of insignificant (significant) negative returns. Hypothesis four cannot be rejected prior to (following) the event date because of insignificant positive (negative) returns, respectively. Hypothesis five cannot generally be accepted because of significantly positive returns. / Hypotheses six through eight state that returns to acquiring firms under the IMM for the three estimation periods, respectively, are not significantly different from zero. Hypothesis six cannot be rejected (accepted) for U.S. (U.K.) firms because of insignificant (significant) negative returns prior to (following) the event, respectively. Hypothesis seven cannot be rejected because of generally insignificant positive returns. Hypothesis eight cannot be accepted because of generally positive returns. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 49-07, Section: A, page: 1904. / Major Professor: Robert L. Conn. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1988.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_77804 |
| Contributors | Connell, Frederick Landon, Jr., Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 345 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds