How Do Top Acquirers Compare in Technology Mergers? New Evidence from an S&P Taxonomy

IF 1.7 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Ginger Zhe Jin , Mario Leccese , Liad Wagman
{"title":"How Do Top Acquirers Compare in Technology Mergers? New Evidence from an S&P Taxonomy","authors":"Ginger Zhe Jin ,&nbsp;Mario Leccese ,&nbsp;Liad Wagman","doi":"10.1016/j.ijindorg.2022.102891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Some argue that large platforms, such as Alphabet/Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft (or GAFAM), are unusual in their number, pace and concentration of technology mergers, with the potential to harm market competition. Using a unique taxonomy developed by S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, we conduct a descriptive study of GAFAM’s M&amp;A activities, comparing them to those of other top acquirers from 2010 to 2020. We find: (i) GAFAM completed more tech acquisitions per firm than other groups of top acquirers, and acquired younger and more consumer-facing firms on average. (ii) The top 25 private equity firms outpaced GAFAM in tech acquisitions per firm since 2018. (iii) GAFAM acquisitions are less concentrated across tech categories than other top acquirer groups, due, in part, to an “acquire-adjacent-and-then-expand” strategy. (iv) Over time, more and more GAFAM and other top acquirers acquire in the same categories. (v) No evidence suggesting that a GAFAM acquisition in a category, compared to similar categories without GAFAM acquisitions, is correlated with a slowdown in the number of new acquirers acquiring in that category. Overall, we find that technology acquisitions do not shield GAFAM from potential competition that may arise from other GAFAM members or other firms that acquire in the same categories.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48127,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Industrial Organization","volume":"89 ","pages":"Article 102891"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Industrial Organization","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167718722000662","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Some argue that large platforms, such as Alphabet/Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft (or GAFAM), are unusual in their number, pace and concentration of technology mergers, with the potential to harm market competition. Using a unique taxonomy developed by S&P Global Market Intelligence, we conduct a descriptive study of GAFAM’s M&A activities, comparing them to those of other top acquirers from 2010 to 2020. We find: (i) GAFAM completed more tech acquisitions per firm than other groups of top acquirers, and acquired younger and more consumer-facing firms on average. (ii) The top 25 private equity firms outpaced GAFAM in tech acquisitions per firm since 2018. (iii) GAFAM acquisitions are less concentrated across tech categories than other top acquirer groups, due, in part, to an “acquire-adjacent-and-then-expand” strategy. (iv) Over time, more and more GAFAM and other top acquirers acquire in the same categories. (v) No evidence suggesting that a GAFAM acquisition in a category, compared to similar categories without GAFAM acquisitions, is correlated with a slowdown in the number of new acquirers acquiring in that category. Overall, we find that technology acquisitions do not shield GAFAM from potential competition that may arise from other GAFAM members or other firms that acquire in the same categories.

技术并购的主要收购者如何比较?来自标准普尔分类的新证据
一些人认为,Alphabet/谷歌、亚马逊、苹果、脸书和微软(GAFAM)等大型平台在技术合并的数量、速度和集中度方面都不寻常,有可能损害市场竞争。使用S&;P Global Market Intelligence,我们对GAFAM的并购进行了描述性研究;A活动,将其与2010年至2020年其他顶级收购方的活动进行比较。我们发现:(i)GAFAM在每家公司完成的技术收购比其他顶级收购方更多,平均而言收购了更年轻、更面向消费者的公司。(ii)自2018年以来,排名前25位的私募股权公司在每家公司的技术收购方面超过了GAFAM。(iii)与其他顶级收购集团相比,GAFAM的收购在科技类领域的集中度较低,部分原因是“相邻收购,然后扩张”的战略。(iv)随着时间的推移,越来越多的GAFAM和其他顶级收购方在同一类别中进行收购。(v) 没有证据表明,与没有收购GAFAM的类似类别相比,某一类别中的GAFAM收购与该类别中新收购方数量的放缓有关。总的来说,我们发现技术收购并不能保护GAFAM免受其他GAFAM成员或其他同类收购公司可能产生的潜在竞争。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
6.70%
发文量
48
审稿时长
77 days
期刊介绍: The IJIO is an international venture that aims at full coverage of theoretical and empirical questions in industrial organization. This includes classic questions of strategic behavior and market structure. The journal also seeks to publish articles dealing with technological change, internal organization of firms, regulation, antitrust and productivity analysis. We recognize the need to allow for diversity of perspectives and research styles in industrial organization and we encourage submissions in theoretical work, empirical work, and case studies. The journal will also occasionally publish symposia on topical issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信