Participation Costs and Inefficiency in Takeover Contests

References

• At C, Morand P-H (2008) Jump bidding in ascending auctions: The case of takeover contests. Econom. Lett. 99(3):458–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berkovitch E, Narayanan M (1990) Competition and the medium of exchange in takeovers. Rev. Financial Stud. 3(2):153–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Betton S, Eckbo BE (2000) Toeholds, bids-jumps and expected payoffs in takeovers. Rev. Financial Stud. 13(4):841–882.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Betton S, Eckbo BE, Thorburn KS (2005) The toeholds puzzle. Working paper.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradley M (1980) Interfirm tender offers and the market for corporate control. J. Bus. 53(4):345–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradley M, Desai A, Kim EH (1983) The rationale behind interfirm tender offers: Information or synergy? J. Financial Econom.11(1–4):183–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bulow J, Huang M, Klemperer P (1999) Toeholds and takeovers. J. Political Econom. 107(3):427–454.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burkart M (1995) Overbidding in takeover contests. J. Finance 50(5):1491–1515.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Celik G, Yilankaya O (2009) Optimal Auctions with simultaneous and costly participation. B.E. J. Theoret. Econom. 9(1):1–31.Google Scholar
• Dodonova A (2012) Toeholds and signalling in takeover auctions. Econom. Lett. 117(2):386–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dodonova A, Khoroshilov Y (2006) Jump bidding in takeover auctions. Econom. Lett. 92(2):339–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dodonova A, Khoroshilov Y (2014) Can preemptive bidding in takeover auctions be socially optimal? Yes it can. North Amer. J. Econom. Finance. 27(C):34–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ettinger D (2009) Takeover contests, toeholds and deterrence. Scandinavian J. Econom. 111(1):103–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fishman M (1988) A theory of preemptive takeover bidding. RAND J. Econom. 19(1):88–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman SJ, Hart OD (1980) Takeover bids, the free-rider problem and the theory of the corporation. Bell J. Econom. 11(1):42–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hirshleifer D, Png I (1989) Facilitation of competing bids and the price of a takeover target. Rev. Financial Stud. 2(4):587–606.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hounwanou DD (2013) Evaluations affiliées, dotations initiales et la surenchère dans les prises de contrôle. Recherches Economiques Louvain 79(3):90–123.Google Scholar
• Jennings RH, Mazzeo MA (1993) Competing bids, target management resistance and the structure of takeover bids. Rev. Financial Stud. 6(4):883–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan TR, Sela A (2010) Effective contests. Econom. Lett. 106(1):38–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khoroshilov Y (2015) Signaling in takeover auctions with flexible reserve price. Managerial Decision Econom. 36(8):499–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matthews SA (1995) A technical primer on auction theory I: Independent private values. Discussion Paper 1096, CMSEMS.Google Scholar
• Samuelson WF (1985) Competitive bidding with entry cost. Econom. Lett. 17(1–2):53–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shleifer A, Vishny RW (1986) Large shareholders and corporate control. J. Political Econom. 94(3):461–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Singh R (1998) Takeover bidding with toeholds: The case of the owner’s curse. Rev. Financial Stud. 11(4):679–704.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stegeman M (1996) Participation costs and efficient auctions. J. Econom. Theory 71(1):228–259.Crossref, Google Scholar