IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/rbfpps/v5y2013i1p4-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managerial gambling attitudes: evidence from bank acquisitions

Author

Listed:
  • John A. Doukas
  • Wenjia Zhang

Abstract

Purpose - This study investigates the implications of the cumulative prospect theory in the context of US bank acquisitions, with particular emphasis on its probability weighting component. Specifically, we examine whether gambling attitudes matter in US bank takeover decisions. The evidence demonstrates that offer price premiums and target announcement returns are much higher in bank takeover transactions involving targets with gambling (lottery) features (high skewness, high volatility, and low price). Overall, the results indicate that banking acquisitions are influenced by gambling attitudes. Design/methodology/approach - To measure idiosyncratic skewness, we follow Harvey and Siddique (2000) and Kumar (2009) and decompose total skewness into its idiosyncratic and systematic components. Findings - The evidence demonstrates that offer price premiums and target announcement returns are much higher in bank takeover transactions involving targets with gambling (lottery) features (high skewness, high volatility, and low price). In addition, we find that synergies and bidder announcement returns are lower in lottery‐type acquisitions. The patterns we document are stronger when bidding banks are bigger, target banks are smaller, investor sentiment is above the median, and the Chicago Fed National Activity Index is negative. Originality/value - This is an original piece of work in the field of banking.

Suggested Citation

  • John A. Doukas & Wenjia Zhang, 2013. "Managerial gambling attitudes: evidence from bank acquisitions," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 4-34, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:rbfpps:v:5:y:2013:i:1:p:4-34
    DOI: 10.1108/RBF-09-2012-0016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/RBF-09-2012-0016/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/RBF-09-2012-0016/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/RBF-09-2012-0016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bradley, Michael & Desai, Anand & Kim, E. Han, 1988. "Synergistic gains from corporate acquisitions and their division between the stockholders of target and acquiring firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 3-40, May.
    2. Lucy Ackert & Narat Charupat & Bryan Church & Richard Deaves, 2006. "An experimental examination of the house money effect in a multi-period setting," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 5-16, April.
    3. Laurent E. Calvet & John Y. Campbell & Paolo Sodini, 2009. "Fight or Flight? Portfolio Rebalancing by Individual Investors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 301-348.
    4. Thierry Post & Martijn J. van den Assem & Guido Baltussen & Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Deal or No Deal? Decision Making under Risk in a Large-Payoff Game Show," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 38-71, March.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Malcolm Baker & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2006. "Investor Sentiment and the Cross‐Section of Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1645-1680, August.
    7. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 2003. "Stock market driven acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 295-311, December.
    8. Mikesell, John L., 1994. "State Lottery Sales and Economic Activity," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 47(1), pages 165-171, March.
    9. Keasey, Kevin & Moon, Philip, 1996. "Gambling with the house money in capital expenditure decisions: An experimental analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 105-110, January.
    10. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    11. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    12. Berger, Allen N. & Saunders, Anthony & Scalise, Joseph M. & Udell, Gregory F., 1998. "The effects of bank mergers and acquisitions on small business lending," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 187-229, November.
    13. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Stefan Nagel, 2008. "Do Wealth Fluctuations Generate Time-Varying Risk Aversion? Micro-evidence on Individuals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 713-736, June.
    14. Brian Boyer & Todd Mitton & Keith Vorkink, 2010. "Expected Idiosyncratic Skewness," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(1), pages 169-202, January.
    15. Moeller, Sara B. & Schlingemann, Frederik P. & Stulz, Rene M., 2004. "Firm size and the gains from acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 201-228, August.
    16. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Robert Gertner, 1993. "Game Shows and Economic Behavior: Risk-Taking on "Card Sharks"," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(2), pages 507-521.
    18. Mikesell, John L., 1994. "State Lottery Sales and Economic Activity," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 47(1), pages 165-71, March.
    19. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    20. Alok Kumar, 2009. "Who Gambles in the Stock Market?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1889-1933, August.
    21. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    22. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    23. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Tano Santos, 2001. "Prospect Theory and Asset Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 1-53.
    24. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. "An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
    25. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. "Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
    26. Campbell R. Harvey & Akhtar Siddique, 2000. "Conditional Skewness in Asset Pricing Tests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(3), pages 1263-1295, June.
    27. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    28. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1976. "Skewness Preference and the Valuation of Risk Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1085-1100, September.
    29. Valery Polkovnichenko, 2005. "Household Portfolio Diversification: A Case for Rank-Dependent Preferences," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 1467-1502.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ioannis Tampakoudis & Andreas Andrikopoulos & Michail Nerantzidis & Nikolaos Kiosses, 2022. "Does boardroom gender diversity affect shareholder wealth? Evidence from bank mergers and acquisitions," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 3315-3344, July.
    2. Lijing Tong & Bin Wu & Min Zhang, 2023. "Local Gambling Attitudes and Audit Quality: Evidence from Audit Adjustments," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 59(1), pages 381-410, March.
    3. Zuo, Jingjing & Qiu, Baoyin & Zhu, Guoyiming & Lei, Guangyong, 2023. "Local speculative culture and stock price crash risk," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. M. V. Shyam Kumar & Jaya Dixit & Bill Francis, 2015. "The impact of prior stock market reactions on risk taking in acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(13), pages 2111-2121, December.
    5. Lin, Nan & Chen, Han & Zhang, Pengdong & Liu, Weiqian, 2022. "Does gambling culture affect firms’ investment efficiency?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maximilian Rüdisser & Raphael Flepp & Egon Franck, 2017. "Do casinos pay their customers to become risk-averse? Revising the house money effect in a field experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(3), pages 736-754, September.
    2. Ohk, Seungbin & Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2021. "Capitalizing on prospect theory value: The Asian developed stock markets," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    3. Montone, Maurizio, 2023. "Beta, value, and growth: Do dichotomous risk-preferences explain stock returns?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    4. Andreas Oehler & Julian Schneider, 2022. "Gambling with lottery stocks?," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(6), pages 477-503, October.
    5. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, March.
    6. Son, Nguyen Truong & Nguyen, Nhat Minh, 2019. "Prospect theory value and idiosyncratic volatility: Evidence from the Korean stock market," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 113-122.
    7. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning analysis of stock market anomalies under prospect stochastic dominance," Working Papers unige:134101, University of Geneva, Geneva School of Economics and Management.
    8. Chabi-Yo, Fousseni & Ruenzi, Stefan & Weigert, Florian, 2018. "Crash Sensitivity and the Cross Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 1059-1100, June.
    9. Mei-Chen Lin, 2020. "When analysts encounter lottery-like stocks: lottery-like stocks and analyst stock recommendations," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 327-353, July.
    10. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    11. T. Clifton Green & Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, 2012. "Initial Public Offerings as Lotteries: Skewness Preference and First-Day Returns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 432-444, February.
    12. Wei Tang & Tianhao Wu & Liheng Xu, 2017. "Skewness Preference and IPO Anomalies in China," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 18(1), pages 173-199, May.
    13. Joshua Traut, 2023. "What we know about the low-risk anomaly: a literature review," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 37(3), pages 297-324, September.
    14. Fang, Yi, 2012. "Aggregate investor preferences and beliefs in stock market: A stochastic dominance analysis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 528-547.
    15. Darren Duxbury & Robert Hudson & Kevin Keasey & Zhishu Yang & Songyao Yao, 2013. "How prior realized outcomes affect portfolio decisions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 611-629, November.
    16. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    17. Andrea Lippi & Laura Barbieri & Mariacristina Piva & Werner De Bondt, 2018. "Time-varying risk behavior and prior investment outcomes: Evidence from Italy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 471-483, September.
    18. Baars, Maren & Mohrschladt, Hannes, 2021. "An alternative behavioral explanation for the MAX effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 868-886.
    19. Zhao, Xiaojuan & Wang, Ye & Liu, Weiyi, 2024. "Someone like you: Lottery-like preference and the cross-section of expected returns in the cryptocurrency market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2020. "Lottery-Related Anomalies: The Role of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 473-501, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:rbfpps:v:5:y:2013:i:1:p:4-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.