考林的市场结构与企业行为

L. Weiss
{"title":"考林的市场结构与企业行为","authors":"L. Weiss","doi":"10.2307/3003107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"* This is a collection of seven essays on assorted topics in industrial organization.1 Most are reports on research in process. The theoretical analysis is often impressive. Most of the papers end with empirical studies that are preliminary and, in a number of cases, unconvincing. In the first piece, Hindley reviews the literature on the causes and effects of mergers. He emphasizes the work of Gort and Dennis Mueller and merely bows to traditional notions about mergers for monopoly or economies of scale and ignores short-run speculative motives. He emphasizes mergers to transfer capital or specialized skills or to increase growth or head off takeovers where managements are growth-maximizers. He notes previous evidence that merging firms are less profitable than either their component predecessors or nonmerging firms and finds it unconvincing because merger may be an attempt to remedy an even poorer prospective performance. He cites his own evidence that a large number of poor performance, widely held firms survive in spite of widespread mergers. This, he feels, is conclusive evidence that the threat of takeover is insufficient to make managers into present value maximizers. It is also inconsistent with growth maximization since a growth maximizer would put a higher value on any firm, efficient or not, than capital markets do.","PeriodicalId":177728,"journal":{"name":"The Bell Journal of Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cowling's Market Structure and Corporate Behavior\",\"authors\":\"L. Weiss\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/3003107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"* This is a collection of seven essays on assorted topics in industrial organization.1 Most are reports on research in process. The theoretical analysis is often impressive. Most of the papers end with empirical studies that are preliminary and, in a number of cases, unconvincing. In the first piece, Hindley reviews the literature on the causes and effects of mergers. He emphasizes the work of Gort and Dennis Mueller and merely bows to traditional notions about mergers for monopoly or economies of scale and ignores short-run speculative motives. He emphasizes mergers to transfer capital or specialized skills or to increase growth or head off takeovers where managements are growth-maximizers. He notes previous evidence that merging firms are less profitable than either their component predecessors or nonmerging firms and finds it unconvincing because merger may be an attempt to remedy an even poorer prospective performance. He cites his own evidence that a large number of poor performance, widely held firms survive in spite of widespread mergers. This, he feels, is conclusive evidence that the threat of takeover is insufficient to make managers into present value maximizers. It is also inconsistent with growth maximization since a growth maximizer would put a higher value on any firm, efficient or not, than capital markets do.\",\"PeriodicalId\":177728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Bell Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Bell Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/3003107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Bell Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3003107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这是关于产业组织中各种主题的七篇论文的合集大多数是正在进行的研究报告。理论分析往往令人印象深刻。大多数论文以初步的实证研究结束,在许多情况下,缺乏说服力。在第一部分中,辛德雷回顾了关于合并的原因和影响的文献。他强调高特和丹尼斯·穆勒的研究成果,仅仅屈从于传统的关于垄断或规模经济的合并观念,忽略了短期的投机动机。他强调合并是为了转移资本或专业技能,或是为了提高增长,或是为了阻止管理层追求增长最大化的收购。他指出,之前有证据表明,合并后的公司比其前身或未合并的公司盈利更少,但他认为这种说法不可信,因为合并可能是为了弥补更差的预期业绩。他援引自己的证据表明,尽管出现了大规模的合并,但大量业绩不佳、被广泛持有的公司仍存活了下来。他认为,这是确凿的证据,表明收购的威胁不足以使管理者成为现值最大化者。它也与增长最大化不一致,因为增长最大化者会比资本市场给任何公司更高的价值,不管它是否有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cowling's Market Structure and Corporate Behavior
* This is a collection of seven essays on assorted topics in industrial organization.1 Most are reports on research in process. The theoretical analysis is often impressive. Most of the papers end with empirical studies that are preliminary and, in a number of cases, unconvincing. In the first piece, Hindley reviews the literature on the causes and effects of mergers. He emphasizes the work of Gort and Dennis Mueller and merely bows to traditional notions about mergers for monopoly or economies of scale and ignores short-run speculative motives. He emphasizes mergers to transfer capital or specialized skills or to increase growth or head off takeovers where managements are growth-maximizers. He notes previous evidence that merging firms are less profitable than either their component predecessors or nonmerging firms and finds it unconvincing because merger may be an attempt to remedy an even poorer prospective performance. He cites his own evidence that a large number of poor performance, widely held firms survive in spite of widespread mergers. This, he feels, is conclusive evidence that the threat of takeover is insufficient to make managers into present value maximizers. It is also inconsistent with growth maximization since a growth maximizer would put a higher value on any firm, efficient or not, than capital markets do.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信