IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jmgtgv/v10y2006i1p77-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Control Premium in Legally Constrained Markets for Corporate Control: The Italian Case (1993–2003)

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Massari
  • Vittorio Monge
  • Laura Zanetti

Abstract

We discuss the simple model pioneered by Barclay and Holderness (1989, Journal of Financial Economics 25: 371–395) and recently reproposed by Dyck and Zingales (2004a, Journal of Finance 2, 537–600; 2004b Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 16, 51–72) in order to measure the value of control in countries, like Italy, where transfer of control is regulated by law. We demonstrate that it is possible to broaden the application of B&H approach to block trades followed by mandatory tender offers and we show the conditions under which we may obtain significant measures of private benefits also when voluntary tender offers are considered. In order to test for our theoretical predictions, we analyse the pricing of 27 control transactions involving the common stock of Italian listed corporations between 1993 and 2003. We find that block-transaction (tender) premium equals on average 8% of the firm’s equity value in the case of pure block-trades, 9% in the case of block trades followed by a mandatory tender offer, while it increases to 18% in the case of voluntary tender offers. The results suggest that, in the case of block trades followed by a mandatory tender offer, the acquirer does not transfer a larger portion of its surplus. This doesn’t take place in the case of voluntary tender offers, in which the raider’s bargaining power collapses. Our estimate of the control premium is sensibly lower than that presented in previous studies based on similar methodologies, providing up-to-date evidence for control stake valuation purposes and for comparison with cross country studies aiming at assessing the quality of rules devoted to minority shareholders’ protection. We also perform a cross-sectional regression analysis of private benefits of control and confirm some of the findings presented in the previous literature: particularly, we find evidence of a positive relation between the magnitude of private benefits of control and the target’s degree of stock-pyramiding. We also find that foreign acquirers and financial investors seem likely to face greater difficulties in extracting private benefits of control. Copyright Springer 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Massari & Vittorio Monge & Laura Zanetti, 2006. "Control Premium in Legally Constrained Markets for Corporate Control: The Italian Case (1993–2003)," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 77-110, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jmgtgv:v:10:y:2006:i:1:p:77-110
    DOI: 10.1007/s10997-005-3560-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10997-005-3560-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10997-005-3560-9?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pérez-Soba, Inés & Martínez-Cañete, Ana R. & Márquez–de-la-Cruz, Elena, 2021. "Private benefits from control block trades in the Spanish stock exchange," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    2. Victor DRAGOTA & Carmen LIPARA & Radu CIOBANU, 2013. "Agency Problems and Synergistic Effects in Romania: The Determinants of the Control Premium," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 63(2), pages 197-219, May.
    3. Sonia P. Jurfest & Ricardo D. Paredes & Julio Riutort, 2015. "Control Premium and Corporate Regulatory Changes: Theory and Evidence," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 53(3), pages 159-187, September.
    4. Antonio Salvi & Emanuele Teti & Anastasia Giakoumelou & Felice Petruzzella, 2021. "Voting Premium in Italy: An Analysis over a 30-Year Period," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(1), pages 206-206, July.
    5. Timothy A. Kruse & Kazunori Suzuki, 2016. "The impact of changes in Japanese tender offer regulations on bidder behavior and shareholder gains," Working Papers halshs-01643926, HAL.

    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:kap:jmgtgv:v:10:y:2006:i:1:p:77-110. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.