The information content of Fairness Opinions in M&A: Evidence from Italy

IF 2.3 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Lucie Courteau
{"title":"The information content of Fairness Opinions in M&A: Evidence from Italy","authors":"Lucie Courteau","doi":"10.3280/fr2020-001001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the major sources of inefficiencies in M&A transactions is the asymmetry of information between the bidder and the target. Several disclosure strategies are used by bidders to convince target shareholders to tender their shares but also to convince their own shareholders about the value of the proposed deal. Target managers also try to communicate to their shareholders their appreciation of the offer. To add credibility to this communication, experts are often called on to express an independent opinion on the offer price, in a document called the Fairness Opinion (FO). While FOs have been found to have no effect on deal efficiency in the US, this study re-examines the issue by considering the actual content of the document, in terms of the valuation process that leads to the expert opinion, in the context of Italian M&As where FOs are mostly voluntary and often provide detailed information about target valuation. The results show that even in a setting where weak enforcement of disclosure regulations allows bidders and targets to choose the level and detail of disclosure, the quality of the content of FO has only a weak association with the performance of the deal, both in terms of bidder announcement returns and of post-deal market and operating performance.","PeriodicalId":42044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Reporting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Reporting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/fr2020-001001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the major sources of inefficiencies in M&A transactions is the asymmetry of information between the bidder and the target. Several disclosure strategies are used by bidders to convince target shareholders to tender their shares but also to convince their own shareholders about the value of the proposed deal. Target managers also try to communicate to their shareholders their appreciation of the offer. To add credibility to this communication, experts are often called on to express an independent opinion on the offer price, in a document called the Fairness Opinion (FO). While FOs have been found to have no effect on deal efficiency in the US, this study re-examines the issue by considering the actual content of the document, in terms of the valuation process that leads to the expert opinion, in the context of Italian M&As where FOs are mostly voluntary and often provide detailed information about target valuation. The results show that even in a setting where weak enforcement of disclosure regulations allows bidders and targets to choose the level and detail of disclosure, the quality of the content of FO has only a weak association with the performance of the deal, both in terms of bidder announcement returns and of post-deal market and operating performance.
并购中公允意见的信息含量:来自意大利的证据
并购交易效率低下的主要原因之一是收购方和被收购方之间的信息不对称。竞标者使用了几种披露策略来说服目标股东投标其股票,同时也让自己的股东相信拟议交易的价值。目标公司的经理也会努力向股东表达他们对收购要约的赞赏。为了增加这种沟通的可信度,专家们经常被要求在一份名为“公平意见”(FO)的文件中对要约价格发表独立意见。虽然在美国发现FOs对交易效率没有影响,但本研究通过考虑文件的实际内容来重新审视这个问题,就导致专家意见的估值过程而言,在意大利并购的背景下,FOs大多是自愿的,并且经常提供有关目标估值的详细信息。结果表明,即使在披露法规执行不力的情况下,允许投标人和目标公司选择披露的水平和细节,无论是在投标人公告收益方面,还是在交易后的市场和经营绩效方面,FO内容的质量与交易绩效之间的关联都很弱。
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
Journal of Financial Reporting
Journal of Financial Reporting BUSINESS, FINANCE-
自引率
6.70%
发文量
19
×
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