Which of the following questions is false?
Purchasing a corporation usually constitutes a very large capital investment decision, so it
requires a more accurate estimate of value that includes careful analysis of both operational
aspects of the firm and the ultimate cash flows the deal will generate.
A stock–swap merger is a positive–NPV investment for the acquiring shareholders if the
share price of the merged firm (the acquirer’s share price after the takeover) exceeds the
premerger price of the acquiring firm.
If we view the pre–bid market capitalization as the stand–alone value of the target, then from
the bidder’s perspective, the takeover is a positive–NPV project only if the synergies created
do not exceed the premium it pays.
Once the acquirer has completed the valuation process, it is in the position to make a tender
offer—that is, a public announcement of its intention to purchase a large block of shares for a
specified price.
Which of the following statements regarding monopoly mergers is false?
It is often argued that merging with or acquiring a major rival enables a firm to substantially
reduce competition within the industry and thereby increase profits.
While only the merging company benefits when competition is reduced, all companies in an
industry pay the associated costs.
Society as a whole bears the cost of monopoly strategies, so most countries have antitrust laws
that limit such activity.
Financial researchers have found that the share prices of other firms in the same industry did
not significantly increase following the announcement of a merger within the industry.
Which of the following statements is false?
For most investors an investment in the stock market is a zero–NPV investment.
An acquirer might be able to add economic value, as a result of an acquisition, that an
individual investor cannot add.
Diversification benefits are by far the most common justification that bidders give for the
premium they pay for a target.
Chief among the costs associated with size is that larger firms are more difficult to manage.