Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acquisition discount and valuation effect of private M&As in China

  • Published:
Journal of Systems Science and Complexity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An acquisition discount can reflect not only the liquidity demands for unlisted targets but also the strategic requirements, management efficiencies and capital allocations for the listed bidders. Based on Officer (2007), the authors choose an acquisition approach to generate an acquisition discount for unlisted targets. In China, unlisted firms are sold at a deeper discount than listed firms. The deeper discount mainly depends on the liquidity demand and the characteristics of the bilateral trading components. Larger bidders tend to pay more, whereas smaller targets are sold at lower discounts. The values of unlisted targets in the TMT industry are underestimated. Furthermore, buying out unlisted targets can significantly increase the abnormal return of public bidders during the announcement period. Deeper discounts or stock payments have a positive effect on the stock values of the bidders, whereas this positive increase will be weakened if the bidder is large or has a previous ownership relationship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Xie H and Wang S, A new approach to model financial markets, Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 2013, 26(3): 432–440.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Officer M S, The price of corporate liquidity: Acquisition discounts for unlisted targets, Journal of Financial Economics, 2007, 83(3): 571–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Paglia J K and Harjoto M, The discount for lack of marketability in privately owned companies: A multiples approach, Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis, 2010, 5(1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Block S, The liquidity discount in valuing privately owned companies, Journal of Applied Finance, 2007, 17(2): 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wang Y and Shao Y, Motivations of Chinese outward direct investment: The sector perspective, Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 2016, 29(3): 698–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Roll R, The hubris hypothesis of corporate takeovers, Journal of Business, 1986, 59(2): 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chari V V, Kehoe P J, and McGrattan E R, Are sructural VARs with long-run restrictions useful in developing business cycle theory?, Journal of Monetary Economics, 2008, 55(8): 1337–1352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fuller K, Netter J, and Stegemoller M, What do returns to acquiring firms tell us? Evidence from firms that make many acquisitions, The Journal of Finance, 2002, 57(4): 1763–1793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hertzel M and Smith R L, Market discounts and shareholder gains for placing equity privately, Journal of Finance, 1993, 48(2): 459–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Comment R, Revisiting the illiquidity discount for private companies: A new (and “Skeptical”) restricted-stock study, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 2012, 24(1): 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Emory Sr J D, Dengel III F R, and Emory Jr J D, The value of marketability as illustrated in initial public offerings of dot-com companies: May 1997 through March 2000, Business Valuation Review, 2000, 19(3): 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Garland P J and Reilly A S, Update on the willamette management associates pre-IPO discount for lack of marketability study for the period 1998 through 2002, Insights (Willamette Management Associates) (Spring 2004), 2004, 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kooli M, Kortas M, and L’her J F, A new examination of the private company discount: The acquisition approach, The Journal of Private Equity, 2003, 6(3): 48–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. DiGabriele J A, The Sarbanes-Oxley act and the private company discount: An empirical investigation, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2008, 19(8): 1105–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Faccio M, McConnell J J, and Stolin D, Returns to acquirers of listed and unlisted targets, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 2006, 41(1): 197–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zou X, Wei Q, and Zhang B, Empirical research on M&A performance of private enterprises in China, Quality & Quantity, 2012, 46(2): 639–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chang S, Takeovers of privately held targets, methods of payment, and bidder returns, Journal of Finance, 1998, 53(2): 773–784.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Masulis R W, Wang C, and Xie F, Corporate governance and acquirer returns, The Journal of Finance, 2007, 62(4): 1851–1889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Moeller S B, Schlingemann F P, and Stulz R M, Firm size and the gains from acquisitions, Journal of Financial Economics, 2004, 73(2): 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Moeller S B, Schlingemann F P, and Stulz R M, Wealth destruction on a massive scale? A study of acquiring-firm returns in the recent merger wave, The Journal of Finance, 2005, 60(2): 757–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dong M, Hirshleifer D, Richardson S, et al, Does investor misvaluation drive the takeover market?, The Journal of Finance, 2006, 61(2): 725–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chao J C, Hausman J A, Newey W K, et al, Testing overidentifying restrictions with many instruments and heteroskedasticity, Journal of Econometrics, 2014, 178: 15–21.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Betton S, Eckbo B E, and Thorburn K S, Merger negotiations and the toehold puzzle, Journal of Financial Economics, 2009, 91(2): 158–178.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Villalonga B, Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the business information tracking series, Journal of Finance, 2004, 59(2): 479–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhou B, Guo J M, Hua J, et al, Does state ownership drive M&A performance? Evidence from China, European Financial Management, 2012, 21(1): 79–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cetorelli N and Strahan P E, Finance as a barrier to entry: Bank competition and industry structure in local US markets, The Journal of Finance, 2006, 61(1): 437–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lang L H P and Stulz R M, Contagion and competitive intra-industry effects of bankruptcy announcements: An empirical analysis, Journal of Financial Economics, 1992, 32(1): 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bajaj M, Denis D J, Ferris S P, et al, Firm value and marketability discounts, The Journal of Corporate Law, 2001, 27: 89–114.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Servaes H, Tobin’s Q and the gains from takeovers, Journal of Finance, 1991, 46(1): 409–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China

    Jichang Dong, Danxiao Jiao & Xilong Sun

Authors
  1. Jichang Dong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Danxiao Jiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xilong Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jichang Dong.

Additional information

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 71173213.

This paper was recommended for publication by Editor ZHANG Xun.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dong, J., Jiao, D. & Sun, X. Acquisition discount and valuation effect of private M&As in China. J Syst Sci Complex 30, 1364–1381 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-017-5274-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-017-5274-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation