Payment Methods in Mergers and Acquisitions: A Theoretical Framework

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 18

International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting

ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Payment Methods in Mergers and Acquisitions: A


Theoretical Framework

B. P. Bijay Sankar (Corresponding author)


PhD Scholar, School of Management, National Institute of Technology Rourkela
Pin-769008, Odisha, India
E-mail: bpbijaysankar@gmail.com

N. M. Leepsa
Assistant Professor, School of Management, National Institute of Technology Rourkela
Pin-769008, Odisha, India
E-mail: leepsan@nitrkl.ac.in

Received: December 23, 2017 Accepted: January 5, 2018 Published: March 6, 2018
doi:10.5296/ijafr.v8i1.12354 URL: https://doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v8i1.12354

Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to review the prior literature on payment methods in Mergers and
Acquisitions (M&As) and summarizing its effects on the performance of companies involved
in M&As. This study also attempts to find out various determinants of the payment methods
of M&As that affects the decision of payment methods in M&As.
Methodology: To carry out the analysis, this study focuses the past literature relating to
payment methods in M&As and summarizes the positive and negative effects of different
payment methods. The review is carried out by dividing into four parts (i) Literature studies
on cash payment method (ii) Literature studies on stock payment method (iii) Literature
studies on mixed payment and (iv) Determinants of payment methods. The paper investigates
based on the findings of the major studies.
Research limitations: The scope of the study is confined to the contemporary review of
M&As literature than the empirical survey. The study is focused more on giving suggestions
for future work on M&As than providing conclusion.

170 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Research Implications: The knowledge gained from this study will help managers from both
acquirer and target companies for selection of appropriate payment methods and improve
their investment mechanism and strengthen their finances by value creation in M&As.
Originality: To the authors’ knowledge this paper is the first attempt to document for
summarizing the impact of different payment methods and its determinants of performance of
M&As deals.
Keywords: Merger and acquisition, Cash payment method, Mixed payment method, Stock
payment methods
JEL Classification: G34
1. Introduction
Merger and Acquisition (M&A) is an important corporate strategy action which is vital for
the corporate sector in order to survive in this competitive world. In recent times, M&A has
turned into a vital component in the economic and business environment and playing an
essential role to respond to the growing global competition and the rapid evolution of markets
(Vyas et al., 2012). Both in terms of values and volumes in M&A have been increasing over
the years throughout worldwide. As per Thomson Reuters, Merger and Acquisition review,
the value of worldwide M&A reached 777.7 billion US dollar during the 1st quarter of 2017
which is an increase of 12% as compared to the 1st quarter of 2016. However, overall 10,433
number of worldwide deals were announced during the 1st quarter of 2017, which is a 9 %
decrease compared to last year’s first quarter. That shows that in spite of decrease in the
number of deal the value of the deal is increased. A large number of research have been done
in the field of M&A. Most of the studies were conducted on the motive of M&A deals during
1970 to 1980 and proved hubris hypothesis, market power hypothesis, synergy hypothesis,
economy of scale and scope hypothesis, managerial hypothesis and method of payment
hypothesis (Chevalier & Redor, 2008). The studies similar to Vyas et al. (2012), Erdogan
(2012) and Ismail et al. (2011) focus on the determinants of M&A and identify that factors
like company size, age of company, leverage, culture, profitability, deal value, management
control, methods of payment, operating activities of company, tax implications and
macro-economic conditions affect the M&A performance. But there are some of studies like
Alshwer, Sibilkov and Zaiats (2011), Andre and Ben-Amar (2009), Dutta, Saadi, and Zhu
(2013) and Boateng and Bi (2013) that focus on determinants of methods of payment and
proclaim that the choice of methods of payment significantly influences M&A performance.
The choice of payment methods is an important risk management strategy. It is very critical
situation that the seller would always want the highest possible price for the business, but in
opposite side, the buyer would want to pay the lowest possible price. In such situation deal is
finalized by satisfying both buyer and seller with appropriate purchase consideration and
payment structure. Payment alternatives chosen in corporate acquisitions is a major decision
making factor for both acquirer and target companies.
According to Ray (2010) the M&A deal value is discharged through various payment mode
i.e. cash, share, debt, Leveraged Buyout (LBO) and earn-out plan. But as per Donald

171 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Depamphilis, (2010) the payment methods of M&A are divided into two types: one is cash
mode another one is non-cash mode. Cash payment mode is the simplest method of making
the payment of M&A deal. In this method, the total deal value discharges through cash
payment. The main advantage of cash payment mode is that the shareholders ownership and
earnings per share are not diluted in the company (Sherman, 2011). In Equity Share financing
method equity shares are given to shareholders of the target company by the acquiring
company. It results in shareholders of target company become the shareholders of an
acquiring company. In Debt and Preference Share payment methods, purchase consideration
is released by contributing a fixed percentage interest and a fixed rate of dividend. The main
aspect of this method is that there is no change in liquidity and ownership position of the
company. In case of Leveraged Buyout (LBO), deal price borrowed funds are utilized to
settle the whole or division of deal price for the acquisition of a company. The borrowed
funds are collected through bank loans, junk bond, loans from Target Company management
and private loans. When the management of the Target Company carries out a leveraged
buyout of the company is called as management buyout or MBO (DePamphilis, 2010)
The pre and post M&A performance of both acquiring company and target company highly
depends upon the method of payment used while making a M&A deal (Chevalier & Redor,
2008; Schlingemann, 2004). The payment method is one of the significant factors in
achieving the success of the deal. The payment methods of deal value are affected by various
factors like liquidity position, risk, leverage, ownership structure, cost of capital, capital
structure, tax implication, dividend policy, premium value, market price of share, government
rules and regulations, profit, free cash flow, equity flow, return on equity, market to book
value, debt flow, transaction cost and target company willingness (Boateng & Bi, 2013;
Kalinowska & Mielcarz, 2014; Barbopoulos & Sudarsanam, 2012).
In the light of past empirical and theoretical literature, this study summarizes both positive
and negative outcomes of various payment methods used in M&A deal. This study also
attempts to find out various determinants of the payment methods of M&A that affects
decision for choice of payment methods of M&A.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section-2 discusses literature review on
methods of payments in M&A, Section-3 find out research gaps, Section-4 formulates the
research questions, Section-5 describes the conceptual framework, Section-6 summarizes the
results.
2. Literature Review
Over the last four decades, most of studies related to M&A were carried out by paying
attention on the financing part of M&A which is driven by various factors of both acquirer
and target companies (Amihud, Lev, & Travlos, 1990; Schlingemann, 2004). Choice of
Payment method of M&A is a critical aspect of the successful M&A deal. A number of
earlier studies have concentrated on M&A payment methods. Studies like Hansen (1987),
Yook et al. (1999), Wansley et al. (1987) and Fishman (1989) developed theories and analyze
the mode of payment in M&A based on asymmetric information. Some studies similar to
Martin (1996), Barbopoulos and Sudarsanam (2012), Boateng and Bi (2013) and Kalinowska

172 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

& Mielcarz (2014) analyze the determinants of M&A payment methods. A few empirical and
theoretical studies, like Travlos (1987), Alexandridis and Travlos (2010) and Ladkani and
Banerjee (2012) concentrated on the shareholder wealth and stock returns due to
announcement of different payment methods M&A deal and disclosed that acquirer returns
are higher those choose cash payment method than those choose stock payment method.
Huang and Walkling (1987) and Franks et al. (1988) proved that the payment method has a
significant impact on the profitability of M&A deal. Faccio and Masulis (2005) focused on
the M&As deals in Europe and reported that mode of payment in M&A are significantly
affected by deal characteristics and target characteristics.
As per the past literature, the acquiring company financial variables affect the choice of
payment methods of M&A. According to Jensen (1986) large amount of cash availability and
sufficient debt raising capacity of acquiring companies prefer cash payment method in M&A
deal rather than stock payment method. The financial factors of the acquiring companies like
cash availability, leverage, collateral and profitability directly influence the decision of
choice of payment methods in M&A transactions (Chaney, Lovata, & Philipich, 1991;
Boateng & Bi, 2013).
According to Travlos (1987), when M&A deals are financed with stocks the abnormal returns
are negative, but in cash payment method it shows positive returns. Similarly, Antoniou and
Zhao (2004) supported that acquirer’s abnormal returns are significantly lower in case of
stock payment methods as compared to cash and mixed payment methods. In the same line of
research, various empirical studies yield evidence of higher returns for the target company
through cash offers M&As Deal. (Huang & Walkling, 1987; Eckbo & Langohr, 1989). Fuller
and Glatzer (2003) focused on the cross border acquisition by U.S. acquirer’s and their
payment methods for acquisitions of foreign targets. They found that acquirer’s returns are
higher in cash payment method.
Studies like Amihud et al. (1990), Martin (1996), Yook et al. (1999) and Faccio and Masulis
(2005) studied the link between managerial ownership of the acquiring company and the
payment mode of M&A and noticed that, managers of the acquiring company prefer
financing with cash payment method because of retaining ownership control with the
company management. Stock financing dilutes the ownership control of acquiring the
company. Amihud et al. (1990) verified that, stock payment method is negatively related to
inside ownership. Martin (1996) analyzed the relationships between management ownership
and investment opportunities with the payment method in corporate acquisitions and found
stock payment method is used at the time of the higher acquirer's growth opportunities. In the
banking sector, when the size of the target company is comparatively higher than acquiring
company the more possibility of use stock or combine of cash and stock as payment method
of M&A deal (Grullon et al. 1997). Boone et al. (2014) emphasized on mixed payment
method and empirically proved that mixed payment method is more used method in most of
the recent M&A deal.
The payment method of M&A affects the advertisement cost of the acquirer. Devos, Elliott
and Karim (2013) examined the relationship between payment method of M&A and

173 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

advertising cost of acquirer and conclude that advertising cost of an acquirer in the pre M&A
period is relatively high in case of a stock based deal than cash based M&A deal. Similarly,
Yung, Sun and Rahman (2013) explored the relationship between earnings quality of the
acquirer and payment method of M&A and point out that the cash payment method of M&A
deal is negatively related with the acquirer long-term earnings quality.
The empirical studies regarding taxation hypothesis such as Niden (1986), Eckbo and
Langohr (1989) and Franks et al. (1988) suggested that cash payment method is more costly
than stock payment method in the reason of immediate taxability whereas stock payment is
taxable only when disposed-off. Ladkani and Banerjee (2012) studied on impact of payment
methods on the shareholder’s wealth of the acquiring companies in M&A in India and found
that, method of payment have positive effects on shareholder wealth. The studies, like Doytch
and Cakan (2011), Doytch & Uctum (2012) and (Ljungman, 2014) analysed the impact of
M&A on economic growth or contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP) of the
country.
Barbopoulos et al. (2017) focused on earnout payment method deals by US acquirers and
found that earnout deal’s performance are better as compare to non-earnout deals when
earnout deal is combined with stocks payment or mixed (cash & stocks) payment. Adra and
Barbopoulos (2018) detected that investor attention act as an important moderator in the
connection between the payment method in M&A and the abnormal returns of acquirer’s
announcement period.
The literature review is made as follows by segregating the past studies based on different
payment methods (cash, stock and mixed) and determinants affecting the choice of payment
method.
2.1 Cash Payment Method
Cash is the most common and simplest form of payment for acquiring shares and assets of
another company. Cash used in M&A transaction may be arranged by the acquiring Company
from internal sources or through additional debt. The main advantage of cash payment
method is a corporate identity and ownership structure remains unchanged. However the
drawback of this method is that there is need of immediate tax payment to target
shareholders.
Huang and Walkling (1987) proved that, the higher amount of cash used in M&A deal leads
to higher abnormal returns to both acquirer and target companies shareholders. Travlos
(1987), Hansen (1987) and Andrade et al. (2001) conformed the same result.
As per free cash flow hypothesis the acquiring company with excess free cash leads to cash
payment in M&A deal. Jensen (1986), Martin (1996) and Chaney et al. (1991) supported to
free cash flow hypothesis and found that there exists a direct relation between return on assets
and cash offers. Similarly, higher managerial ownership leads to higher cash payment in
M&A deal (Amihud et al., 1990).
Some empirical studied only concentrated on taxation hypothesis and observed that cash
payment method is more costly due to immediate taxability (Auerbach & Reishus, 1988;
Eckbo & Langohr, 1989).

174 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Fuller and Glatzer (2003) focused on the cross border acquisition by U.S. acquirer and their
payment method for acquisitions of foreign targets. They found that acquirer’s returns are
higher in cash payment method.
In the below Table 1 we summarized the both positive and negative results based on past
empirical studies relating to cash payment method in M&A.

Table 1. Literature on Cash Payment Method


Results Major Findings Evidence
Abnormal return is higher in case of cash payment (Wansley, Lane, & Yang,
method than stock payment method in the initial 1987); (Huang &
days after the announcement period of M&A. Walkling, 1987); (Hansen,
1987); (Fishman, 1989);
(Antoniou & Zhao, 2004);
(Andrade et al. 2001)
Cash payment method takes less time to (Wansley, Lane, & Yang,
accomplish the deal than stock payment method. 1987) (Fishman, 1989)
Positive General performance is better for both acquirer (Travlos, 1987); (Linn &
Results and target in case of cash financing than a Switzer, 2001); (Tichy,
combination of cash and stocks financing in 2001); (Andre et al.,
M&A. 2004); (Harris, Franks, &
Mayer, 1987)
Asset acquisitions are more possible to be (Swieringa & Schauten,
financed through cash than stock issue. 2007)
In cash offer, return on assets in the (Kalinowska & Mielcarz,
post-transaction period is significantly higher than 2014) (Rahman, 2002)
the shares payment method or mixed payments
method.
Cash payment method in M&As deals does not (Dube& Glascock, 2006);
have a positive impact on profitability. (Heron & Lie, 2002)
Negative The instant taxability makes cash payment method (Niden, 1986); (Franks et
Results is more costly than stock payment method which al., 1988); (Eckbo &
is taxable only when stock disposed-off. Langohr, 1989)
Cash method of payment is negatively associated
with financial constraints of acquirer.

2.2 Stock Payment Method


Stock payment method is a non-cash payment method in which acquiring companies issue
own equity share to target company as purchase consideration of the deal. Under this method,
both acquirer and target company share post M&A deal outcome. The important part of this
method is to determine of a rational exchange ratio. The exchange ratio and the
price--earnings ratio of the companies are two important factors that significantly affect the

175 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

actual benefits to the shareholders of acquiring companies those choose stock as payment
method of M&As deals. Usually it is an ideal method of financing a M&A deal in case the
price-earnings ratio of the acquiring company is comparatively higher than the target
company.
Faccio and Masulis (2005) and Alshwer et al. (2011) developed a financial constraints
hypothesis which is just opposite of free cash flow hypothesis. This hypothesis explained that
financially constrained firms are more likely to use stock payment method. Similarly Industry
relatedness hypothesis implies that the deals in related industries would attract stock payment
(Swieringa & Schauten, 2007). Chang (1998) and Draper and Paudyal (2006) evidenced that
in stock payment method the abnormal return is positive in the case of privately held target
companies.
The main disadvantage of stock payment method is that it takes more time to complete the
deal. It also involves more transaction cost and lots of legal procedures for the deal (Myers &
Majluf, 1984).
Cho and Ahn (2017) studied on cross-border M&A by taking 4720 sample from 42 countries
and found that the cross-border M&A deals through stock payment method normally has a
negative impact on shareholder value. In takeovers deal acquirer’s short-run and long-run
performance is affected negatively when deal finance through stock (Fischer, 2017).
In the below Table 2 we summarized the both positive and negative results based on past
empirical studies relating to stock payment method in M&A.

Table 2. Literature on Stock Payment Method


Results Major Findings Evidence
Higher investment opportunities of the acquiring (Martin, 1996); (Verter
company lead to an increased use of stock financing in & Geo¤rey, 2002)
corporate acquisitions.
Most overvalued companies normally use stock (Savor & Lu, 2009);
Positive
payment method for acquisitions than cash payment (Shleifer, & Vishny,
Results
method. 2003);
Acquiring companies’ gains have positively related to (Schlingemann, 2004)
the amount of stock financing occurred during the
financial year before the M&A announcement.
In stock payment method for acquisitions the (Heron & Lie, 2002)
acquiring companies disappoint their investors.
Negative Stock payment method in M&A financing creates (Loughran, & Vijh,
Results negative long-term abnormal returns for acquiring 1997); (Mitchell &
company. Stafford, 2000)
Stock payment method is more costly than cash (Myers & Majluf,
payment method in term of transaction cost. 1984)

176 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

2.3 Mixed Payment Method


The mixed payment method is the combination of both cash and non-cash payment method.
In this payment method, the purchase consideration is discharged through a mixture of cash,
stock and debt. In mixed payment deals, the abnormal returns of both acquirer and target
company is different from all cash and all stock deals (Scheuering, 2015). Eckbo et al. (1989)
have empirically tested that the abnormal returns are positive and significantly higher in
mixed payment method. Similarly, De et al. (1996) revealed in his study that mixed offers are
more competitive in comparison to stock-only and cash-only offers. In contrary to this,
Erickson and Wang (1999) have empirically tested that there is no differences in the use of
different payment method (cash, stocks, and mixed method) used by the acquirer. In recent
years, the use of mixed payment method has risen. The number of mixed-payment deals have
increased three times since the end of the 1990s to 2008 (Boone, Lie, & Liu, 2014).
In the below Table 3 we summarized the both positive and negative results based on past
empirical studies relating to mixed payment method in M&A.

Table 3. Literature on Mixed Payment Method

Results Major Findings Evidence


Mixed payments method is more used mode in M&A deal (Boone, Lie, & Liu,
in the new century than previous. 2014); (Scheuering,
2015)
Mixed payment method is primarily different from both (Heron & Lie,
Positive cash and stock payment methods in M&A. 2002) (Faccio &
Results Masulis, 2005)
Abnormal return is significantly higher for the acquiring (Eckbo & Langohr,
company in case of a mixed payment method than cash 1989)
and stock-only payment method.
Large M&A deal commonly finance with mixed payment (Boone, Lie, & Liu,
method. 2014)
In mixed payment method average return on assets (ROA) (Kalinowska &
is lower than cash payment method in Eastern European Mielcarz, 2014)
Negative
markets M&A deal.
Results
Target company abnormal returns are lower in mixed ( Weitzel & Kling
offers than in pure cash offers 2013),

2.4 Determinants of Payment Methods in M&A


The choice of the payment methods of M&A depends upon different factors. Various past
empirical and theoretical studies focused on factors of the payment method in M&A and
found that the factors like Ownership Structure, Financial Leverage, Free Cash Flow, Size of
the Deal, Tax Considerations, Tobin’s Q, Asymmetric Information, Growth Opportunities,
Business Cycle, Corporate Governance, Motives of Deal and Government Rule and

177 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Regulation are significantly influence the decision for choice of payment method in M&A
deal.

Table 4. Literature on Determinants of Payment Method in M&A and Its Effect on Abnormal
Returns

Effect on the payment Effect on acquirer


Determinants Evidence
method of M&A abnormal returns
Financial 1) High Financial leverage Highly leveraged firm uses (Uysal,
Leverage acquiring Companies use stock financing lead to 2011) ;(Trifts,
less cash financing and better abnormal returns. 1991)
likely to finance with
stock.
2) Moderate financial
leveraged acquiring
companies have no effect
on choice of payment
methods in M&A.
Free Cash More Cash availability Large cash availability (Jensen, 1986)
Flow with the acquiring may attract management to (Martin, 1996)
company refers to making go for expansion of
use of cash financing as a business and that is
means of payment in expected to have a
M&A deal. negative influence on
abnormal returns.
Relatedness Stock payment method is Related M&A deal shows (Faccio &
more likely to be used in positively effect on Masulis, 2005)
the related M&A deal. acquirer abnormal returns.
Size of the Stock financing has a Deal size is positively (Swieringa &
deal positive relation to M&A affects the abnormal return Schauten, 2007);
deal size. of acquiring company. (Faccio &
Masulis, 2005)
Tax Stock financing is used to More tax payment leads to (Ayers,
considerations take advantage of a negative impact on Lefanowicz, &
immediate tax payment abnormal returns. Robinson,
than other payment 2004); (Travlos,
methods. 1987) (Brown &
. D.Ryngaert,
1991)
Tobin’s Q There is a negative Acquirer abnormal returns (Boateng & Bi,
relationship between are significantly higher for 2013); (Martin,
Tobin’s Q and use of cash greater Tobin’s Q acquirer 1996);
financing as a payment than lower Tobin’s Q (Doukas, 1995)

178 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Effect on the payment Effect on acquirer


Determinants Evidence
method of M&A abnormal returns
method. acquirer

Asymmetric Inside information of More information relating (Hansen, 1987);


information acquiring company affects to target company near to (Myers &
choice of payment more abnormal return. Majluf, 1984);
methods. Favorable (Travlos, 1987)
information relating to
acquirer performance lead
to stock financing.

Ownership of Acquiring company Better managing of (Amihud, Lev,


managers prefers to cash financing to acquiring company & Travlos,
prevent dilution of management is expected 1990); (Martin,
ownership of management. from block holders, which 1996); (Yook,
positively impacts Gangopadhyay,
abnormal return. & McCabe,
1999);
Growth Acquiring Company with Growth opportunities lead (Alshwer,
opportunities highly growth to higher abnormal return. Sibilkov, &
opportunities chooses Zaiats, 2015);
stock financing in M&A (Martin, 1996);
deal. (Faccio &
Masulis, 2005)
The relative Acquiring company It is normally difficult to (Hansen, 1987);
size of the involve stock financing generate abnormal returns (Schlingemann,
acquirer and when the size of the target when the target is bigger 2004); (Boateng
target company is bigger than its than the acquirer & Bi, 2013)
companies company.
Business Cycle Stock financing is used in Timing of acquisition (Choe, Masulis,
case of earlier stages of the comparative to the market & Nanda, 1993);
business cycle, higher cycle is negative correlated (Kusewitt, 1985)
share price and to performance
expansionary phases of the
business cycle.
Corporate The size board of directors There is a positive (Butt & Hasan,
Governance in a company is performed relationship between board 2009), (Andre &
a significant role in capital size and acquisition Ben-Amar,
structure decisions. announcement cumulative 2009), (Black,
abnormal return. 1992)

179 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

The payment method in M&A has significant implication for both the acquiring and target
companies, including post-takeover ownership structure, risk profile, capital structure and the
allocation of synergy from the transaction (Faccio & Masulis, 2005). There are less studies
given attention to the abnormal return of both acquirer and target due to announcement of
different payment methods M&As deals. Still, there is no clear cut evidence that the effect of
acquiring companies and target companies characteristics on choice of payment method in
M&A deal.
3. Research Gaps
 The previous empirical and theoretical studies on payment methods of M&A have
focused on specific developed economies countries like The United States of America
(USA) and the United Kingdom (UK) which have scattered over ownership structures,
long term performance, tax implication, bid premium, free cash flow, financial
leverage, equity overvaluation, and the relative size, but there is limited number of
study focus on developing and under- developed countries.
 The impact on the payment methods of M&A due to changes in rules and regulations
relating to M&A not focused in earlier studies.
 There are insignificant studies deals with the relationship between different payment
methods of M&A and macro- economic conditions of the country.
4. Research Questions
There are several research issued that can be pursued based on research gaps. Several key
questions to be answered include:
 Is the payment method in M&A affecting the performance of acquiring Company and
Target Company in M&A deal in emerging and developing countries?
 What is the recent trend of payment methods used by acquiring companies in
emerging countries, whether they choose stock as a payment method or cash method
of payment or hybrid method of payment?
 Which factors do influence the choice of payment method in M&A?

o What is the impact of industry characteristics on the method of payment in


Mergers and Acquisitions?

o What is the impact of firm characteristics (acquiring company and target


company) and deal characteristics on the method of payment in Mergers and
Acquisitions?

180 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

5. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework of the choice of payment method in M&A can be built on a model
based on the determinants of acquiring company characteristics, target company
characteristics, deal characteristics and rule & regulation relating to M&A. Therefore, a
complete measurement and understanding of the foundation is needed to develop a model.
The conceptual model is developed on the basis of previous theoretical and empirical
literature that will help both acquiring company and target company management for decision
making on choice of payment method in M&A deal.

Figure 1. Conceptual Model


Source: Author’s Own Compilation from literature review

181 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

6. Summary of Results & Concluding Remarks


In light of reviewing recent literature on payment methods of M&A, we have summarized the
findings based on different payment methods and determinants. Some authors found positive
as well as negative results in relation to company performance relating to cash, stock and
mixed payment method.
Studies that focused only on cash payment method have shown inconsistent results. However,
few studies reported positive abnormal return and higher Return on Assets in cash payment
method. On the other side, some authors have endowed that Cash financing of M&A deal
does not have a positive impact on profitability. In addition, tax liability in cash payment
method is higher than the stock payment method. Some studies indicated that, there is a
positive result in the company’s performance after M&A as the level of stock financing is
directly related to gains of the acquiring company. However, few researchers have found that,
stock payment method creates negative long-term abnormal returns for acquiring company.
The stock payment method is also being more costly than cash payment method in terms of
transaction costs. A number of studies proclaimed that, mixed payment method is more used
method in M&A deal in the new century than the previous years.
From various literatures, we found that the factors like financial leverage, free cash flow,
relatedness, relatedness, tax considerations, Tobin’s Q, asymmetric information, ownership of
managers, growth opportunities, relative size of the acquirer and target companies, business
cycle and corporate governance are significantly impact the choice of payment method of
M&A deal and affects the abnormal return of acquiring company. Very few studies argue that,
GDP and macro-economic conditions are affected through the payment methods of M&A. It
is found that target company abnormal returns are lower in mixed payment method than stock
or cash each payment method separately.
This paper sheds light on the importance of payment methods of M&A that may lead to
synergy gains and ultimate success of M&A deal. This study will help both acquiring
Company’s and Target Company’s management to take proper decision for financing and
making investment in M&A deal.
References
Adra, S., & Barbopoulos, L.G. (2018). The valuation effects of investor attention in
stock-financed acquisitions. Journal of Empirical Finance, 45, 108-125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2017.10.001
Alexandridis, D.P., & Travlos, N. (2010). Gains from Mergers and Acquisitions Around the
World: New Evidence. Financial Management, 39(4), 1671-1695.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-053X.2010.01126.x
Alshwer, A.A., Sibilkov, V., & Zaiats, N. (2011). Financial Constraints and the Method of
Payment in Mergers and Acquisitions. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1364455

182 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Amihud, Y., Lev, B., & Travlos, N.G. (1990). Corporate Control and the Choice of
Investment Financing: The Case of Corporate Acquisitions. The Journal of Finance, 45(2),
603-616. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb03706.x
Andre, P., & Ben-Amar, W. (2009). Control Threat and Means of Payment: Evidence from
Canadian Mergers and Acquisitions.
Ang, J.S., & Ismail, A.K. (2015). What Premiums Do Target Shareholders Expect?
Explaining Negative Returns upon Offer Announcements. Journal of Corporate Finance, 30,
245-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2014.12.015
Auerbach, A.J., & Reishus, D. (1988). The Impact of Taxation on Mergers and Acquisitions.
University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226032177.001.0001
Ayers, B.C., Lefanowicz, C.E., & Robinson, J.R. (2004). The Effect of Shareholder-Level
Capital Gains Taxes on Acquisition Structure. American Accounting Association, 79(4),
859-887. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2004.79.4.859
Barbopoulos & Sudarsanam. (2012). Determinants of Earnout as Acquisition Payment
Currency and Bidder’s Value Gains. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(3), 678-694.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.10.007
Barbopoulos, L.G., Paudyal, K., & Sudarsanam, S. (2017). Earnout deals: method of initial
payment and acquirers' gain. European Financial Management, 1-43.
https://doi.org/10.1111/eufm.12135
Black, B.S. (1992). Institutional Investors and Corporate Governance: The Case for
Institutional Voice. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 5(3), 19-32.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.1992.tb00223.x
Boateng, A., & Bi, X. (2013). Acquirer Characteristics and Method of Payment: Evidence
from Chinese Mergers and Acquisitions. Managerial and Decision Economics, 35(8),
540-554. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2640
Boone, A.L., Lie, E., & Liu, Y. (2014). Time Trends and Determinants of the Method of
Payment in M&As. Journal of Corporate Finance, 27, 296-304.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2014.05.015
Brown, D.T., & D.Ryngaert, M. (1991). The Mode of Acquisition in Takeovers: Taxes and
Asymmetric Information. The Journal of Finance, 46(2), 653-669.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb02678.x
Butt, S.A., & Hasan, A. (2009). Impact of Ownership Structure and Corporate Governance on
Capital Structure of Pakistani Listed Companies. International Journal of Business &
Management, 4(2), 50-57.
Chaney, P.K., Lovata, L.M., & Philipich, K.L. (1991). Acquiring Firm Characteristics and the
Medium of Exchange. Journal of Business and Economics, 30(4), 55-69.

183 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Chevalier, A., & Redor, E. (2008). The Choice of the Payment Method in Mergers and
Acquisitions. In Handbook of Financial Engineering (pp. 385-430). Springer US.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-76682-9_13
Choe, H., Masulis, R.W., & Nanda, V. (1993). Common stock offerings across the business
cycle: Theory and evidence. Journal of Empirical Finance, 1(1), 3-31.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0927-5398(93)90003-A
Cho, H., & Ahn, H.S. (2017). Stock payment and the effects of institutional and cultural
differences: A study of shareholder value creation in cross-border M&As. International
Business Review, 26(3), 461-475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.10.004
DePamphilis, D. (2010). Mergers and Acquisitions Basics Negotiation and Deal Structuring.
Academic Press.
Devos, E., Elliott, W.B., & Karim, M.A. (2013). Product Market Advertising Effects on the
Method of Payment in M&A. Managerial Finance, 39(4), 362-383.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03074351311306184
Doukas, J. (1995). Overinvestment, Tobin's q and gains from foreign acquisitions. Journal of
Banking & Finance, 19(7), 1285-1303. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4266(94)00117-L
Doytch, N., & Cakan, E. (2011). Growth Effects of Mergers and Acquisitions: A Sector-level
Study of OECD countries. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 1(3),
120-129.
Doytch, N., & Uctum, M. (2012). Sectoral Growth Effects of Cross-Border Mergers and
Acquisitions. Eastern Economic Journal, 38(3), 319-330. https://doi.org/10.1057/eej.2011.16
Dutta, S., Saadi, S., & Zhu, P. (2013). Does Payment Method Matter in Cross-Border
Acquisitions? International Review of Economics & Finance, 25, 91-107.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2012.06.005
Eckbo, B.E., & Langohr, H. (1989). Information Disclosure, Method of Payment, and
Takeover Premiums: Public and Private Tender Offers in France. Journal of Financial
Economics, 24(2), 363-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(89)90052-4
Erdogan, A.I. (2012). The Determinants of Mergers and Acquisitions: Evidence from Turkey.
International Journal of Economics and Finance, 4(4), 72-77.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v4n4p72
Erickson, M. (1988). The Effect of Taxes on the Structure of Corporate Acquisitions. Journal
of Accounting Research, 36(2), 279-298. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491478
Faccio, M., & Masulis, R.W. (2005). The Choice of Payment Method in European Mergers
and Acquisitions. The Journal of Finance, 60(3), 1345-1388.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00764.x
Fischer, M. (2017). The source of financing in mergers and acquisitions. The Quarterly
Review of Economics and Finance. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2017.01.003

184 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Fishman, M.J. (1989). Preemptive Bidding and the Role of the Medium of Exchange in
Acquisitions. The Journal of Finance, 44(1), 41-57.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1989.tb02403.x
Fuller, K.P., & Glatzer, M.B. (2003). Method-of-Payment Choice for International Targets.
Advances in Financial Economics, 8(1), 47-64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1569-3732(03)08003-4
Garcia-Feijoo, L., Maduraa, J., & Ngo, T. (2012). Impact of Industry Characteristics on the
Method of Payment in Mergers. Journal of Economics and Business, 64(4), 261-274.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2012.03.003
Gorbenko, A.S., & Malenko, A. (2017). The timing and method of payment in mergers when
acquirers are financially constrained. Review of Financial Studies.
https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhx126
Hansen, R.G. (1987). A Theory for the Choice of Exchange Medium in Mergers and
Acquisitions. Journal of Business, 60(1), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1086/296386
Harris, R., Franks, J., & Mayer, C. (1987). Means of Payment in Takeovers Results for the
UK and US.
Heron, R., & Lie, E. (2002). Operating Performance and the Method of Payment in
Takeovers. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 3(1), 137-155.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3594998
Huang, Y.-S., & Walkling, R.A. (1987). Target Abnormal Returns Associated with
Acquisition Announcements: Payment, Acquisition Form, and Managerial Resistance.
Journal of Financial Economics, 19(2), 329-349.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(87)90008-0
Ismail, T.H., Abdou, A.A., & Annis, R.M. (2011). Review of Literature Linking Corporate
Performance to Mergers and Acquisitions. The Review of Financial and Accounting Studies,
(1), 89-104.
Jensen, M.C. (1986). Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers.
American Economic Review, 76(2), 323-329.
Kalinowska, A., & Mielcarz, P. (2014). Methods of Payment in M&A Transactions and
Operational Performance of Acquirers. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2419742
Kar, R.N., & Soni, A. (2015, January 8). Mergers and Acquisitions in India: A Strategic
Impact Analysis for the Corporate Enterprises in the Post Liberalization Period. Indira
Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR). Retrieved February 2, 2015, from
http://www.igidr.ac.in/conf/money1/MERGERS%20AND%20ACQUISITIONS%20IN%20I
NDIA.pdf

185 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Kusewitt, J.B. (1985). An Exploratory Study of Strategic Acquisition Factors Relating to


Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 6(2), 151-169.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060205
Ladkani, R., & Banerjee, A. (2012, August). Emerging Market Bidder Returns and the
Choice of Payment Method in M&A: Evidence from India. In Midwest Finance Association
2013 Annual Meeting Paper.
Ljungman, L. (2014). The Relationship between Method of Pay-ment in Mergers and
Acquisitions and GDP in The United States An Empirical Study.
Ma, J., Pagan, J.A., & Chu, Y. (2009). Abnormal Returns to Mergers and Acquisitions in ten
Asian stock markets. International Journal of Business, 14(3), 235-250.
Martin, K.J. (1996). The Method of Payment in Corporate Acquisitions, Investment
Opportunities, and Management Ownership. The Journal of Finance, 51(4), 1227-1246.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1996.tb04068.x
Myers, S.C., & Majluf, N.S. (1984). Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When
Firms have Information that Investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2),
187-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(84)90023-0
Rahman, R.A. (2002). Effects of Acquisition Characteristics on the Post-acquisition
Performance of Malaysian Companies. Asian Review of Accounting, 10(1), 49-76.
https://doi.org/10.1108/eb060749
Ray, K.G. (2010). Mergers and Acquisitions strategy,valuation and integration. PHI
Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Savor, P.G., & Lu, Q. (2009). Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers? The Journal of
Finance, 64(3), 1061-1097. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01459.x
Scheuering, U. (2015, January 15). Retrieved from
http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp14019.pdf
Schlingemann, F.P. (2004). Financing Decisions and Bidder gains. Journal of Corporate
Finance, 10(5), 683-701. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1199(03)00043-9
Sherman, A.J. (2011). Mergers & Acquisitions From A to Z. New York: AMACOM.
Swieringa, J., & Schauten, M. (2007). The Payment Method Choice on Dutch Mergers and
Acquisitions. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1018899
Travlos, N.G. (1987). Corporate Takeover Bids, Methods of Payment, and Bidding Firms'
Stock Returns. The Journal of Finance, 42(4), 943-963.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1987.tb03921.x
Trifts, J.W. (1991). Corporate Takeover Bids, Methods of Payment and the Effects of
Leverage. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 30(3), 33-47.

186 http://ijafr.macrothink.org
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting
ISSN 2162-3082
2018, Vol. 8, No. 1

Uysal, V.B. (2011). Deviation from the Target Capital Structure and Acquisition Choices.
Journal of Financial Economics, 102(3), 602-20.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.11.007
Vyas, V., Narayanan, K., & Ramanathan, A. (2012). Determinants of Mergers and
Acquisitions in Indian Pharmaceutical Industry. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics,
5(9), 79-102.
Wansley, J.W., Lane, W.R., & Yang, H.C. (1987). Gains to Bidder Firms in Cash and
Securities Transactions. The Financial Rewiew, 22(4), 403-414.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6288.1987.tb01263.x
Yook, K.C., Gangopadhyay, P., & McCabe, G.M. (1999). Information Asymmetry Theory,
Management Control Theory, and Method of Payment in Acquisitions. Journal of Financial
Research, 22(4), 413-427. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6803.1999.tb00703.x
Yung, K., Sun, Q., & Rahman, H. (2013). Acquirer’s earnings quality and the choice of
payment method in mergers and acquisitions. Managerial Finance, 39(10), 979-1000.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-06-2012-0132

Copyright Disclaimer
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to
the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

187 http://ijafr.macrothink.org

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy