Skip to main content
Log in

Bidder returns in interstate and intrastate bank acquisitions

  • Published:
Journal of Financial Services Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Returns to bidders are examined for 108 bank acquisitions over the 1981–1987 period. These returns provide evidence on the conflict-of-interest hypothesis and the hubris hypothesis, both of which predict negative returns to bidders, versus the shareholder wealth maximization model that predicts positive (or at least non-negative) returns. Further evidence on these hypotheses is provided from the returns on 18 defensive acquisitions. Consistent with the conflict-of-interest and hubris hypotheses, announcement period returns are negative and statistically significant both for interstate and intrastate acquisitions. However, bidder returns to interstate bank acquisitions do not differ significantly from intrastate mergers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Bankers Association, Office of the General Counsel.Fact Sheet on Interstate Banking (July 1988).

  • Amel, D., and M., Jacowski. “Trends in Banking Structure Since the Mid-1970s.”Federal Reserve Bulletin 75 (March 1989), 120–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amel, D., Keane, D. “State Law Affecting Commercial Bank Branching, Multibank Holding Company Expansion, and Interstate Banking”. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Working Paper (July 1985).

  • Asquith, P., Bruner, R.F., and Mullins, D.W. “The Gains to Bidding Firms from Merger”.Journal of Financial Economics 11 (April 1983), 121–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, H.A., Fields, M.A., and Schweitzer, R.L. “Changes in Interstate Banking Laws: The Impact on Shareholder Wealth”.Journal of Finance 45 (December 1990), 1663–1671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Born, J.R., Eisenbeis, R.A., and Harris, R.S. “The Benefits of Geographical and Product Expansion in the Financial Services Industry”.Journal of Financial Services Research 1 (1988), 161–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, M., Desai, A., and Kim, E.H. “Synergistic Gains from Corporate Acquisitions and Their Division Between the Stockholders of Target and Acquiring Firms”.Journal of Financial Economics 21 (May 1988), 3–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornett, M.M., and De, S. “Bidder Returns in Corporate Takeover Bids: Evidence from Interstate Bank Mergers”. Southern Methodist University (March 1989).

  • Desai, A., and Stover, R. “Bank Holding Company Acquisitions, Stockholder Returns, and Regulatory Uncertainty”.Journal of Financial Research 8 (Summer 1985), 145–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubofsky, D., and Fraser, D. “Regulatory Change and the Market for Bank Control”. In: Gup, ed.,Bank Mergers. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988, pp. 121–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawawini, G., and Swary, I. “Mergers and Acquisitions in Banking: Evidence from the Capital Markets”. Working Paper, INSEAD (February 1989).

  • James, C., and Wier, P. “Determinants of The Division of Gains in Corporate Acquisitions: Evidence From the Banking Industry”. University of Rochester Center for Research in Government Policy and Business, pp. 86–90.

  • James, C., and Wier, P. “Returns to Acquirers and Competition in the Acquisitions Market: The Case of Banking”.Journal of Political Economy 95 (April 1987), 355–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarrell, G., and Bradley, M. “The Economic Effects of Federal and State Regulations of Cash Tender Offers”.Journal of Law and Economics 23 (October 1980), 371–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.C. “Agency Costs of Free Cash Flows, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers”.American Economic Review 76 (May 1986), 323–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.C., and Meckling, W.H. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure”.Journal of Financial Economics 3 (October 1976), 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laderman, E., and Pozdena, R. “Interstate Banking and Competition: Evidence from the Behavior of Stock Returns”. Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (1991).

  • McDermott, J. “A Market View of Recent Merger Trends”.Issues in Bank Regulation 12 (Winter 1989), 15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M.L., and Lehn, K. “Do Bad Bidders Become Good Targets?”Journal of Political Economy 98 (April 1990), 372–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, S.C., and Majluf, N.S. “Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When Firms Have Information that Investors Do Not Have”.Journal of Financial Economics 13 (June 1984), 187–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neeley, W. “Banking Acquisitions: Acquirer and Target Shareholder Returns”.Financial Management 16 (Winter 1987), 66–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roll, R. “The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers”.Journal of Business 59 (1986), 197–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, P.The Interstate Banking Movement. Westpoint, CT: Quorum Books, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholes, M., and Williams, J. “Estimating Betas from Nonsynchronous Data”.Journal of Financial Economics 5 (December 1977), 309–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyhun, H.N. “Do Bidder Managers Knowingly Pay Too Much for Target Firms?”Journal of Business 63 (October 1990), 439–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifts, J., and Scanlon, K. “Interstate Bank Mergers: The Early Evidence”.The Journal of Financial Research 10 (Winter 1987), 305–312.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baradwaj, B.G., Dubofsky, D.A. & Fraser, D.R. Bidder returns in interstate and intrastate bank acquisitions. J Finan Serv Res 5, 261–273 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00115321

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00115321

Keywords

Navigation