請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/4677完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陳聖賢(Sheng-Syan Chen) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pei-Hua Wu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 吳佩樺 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-14T17:45:07Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2020-07-27 | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-05-14T17:45:07Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2015-07-27 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2015-07-21 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 1. Ahern, K.R. and Harford, J., 2014, “The Importance of Industry Links in Merger Waves,” The Journal of Finance, 69, 527-576.
2. Ahern, K.R., 2012, “Bargaining power and industry dependence in mergers,” Journal of Financial Economics, 530-550. 3. Amit, R and Livnat, J, 1988, “Diversification and the Risk-return Trade-off,” Academy of Management Journal. 4. Beard, T. R., D. L. Kaserman and J. W. Mayo, 2001,“Regulation Vertical Integration and Sabotage,” Journal of lndustrial Economics,Vol.49, No.3, 319-333. 5. Beattie, D.L., 1980, “Conglomerate Diversification and Performance: A Survey and Time Series Analysis,” Applied Economics, 12, pp.251-273. 6. Birkinshaw, J., and Nobel, R., “Innovation in Multinational Corporations: Control and Communication Patterns in International R&D Operations,” Strategic Management, Journal 19(5), 479-496. 7. Bradley, M., Desai, A., and Kim, E. H., 1988, “Synergistic Gains from Corporate Acquisitions and their Division between the Stockholders of Target and Acquiring Firms,” Journal of Financial Economic. 8. Brigham, E. F., 1986, “Cases in Managerial Finance,” Dryden Press, Chicago. 9. Cassiman, B., Colombo, M. G., Garrone, P., and Veugeler, R.,2005, “The Impact of M&A on R&D Process: An Empirical Analysis of the Role of Technological- and Market- Relatedness,” Research Policy, Vol. 34, No.2, pp. 195-220. 10. Chang, Y.L., 2013a, “The Relationship between Acquisition Behavior and Operating Performance in Short and Middle-Long Run,” National Taiwan University Master Thesis. 11. Chang, Y.Y., 2013b, “The Success or Failure of M&A: Evidence from TWSE-Listed Companies,” National Chung Cheng University Master Thesis. 12. Chatterjee, S., 1986, “Types of Synergy and Economic Value: The Impact of Acquisition on Merging and Rival Firms,” Strategic Management Journal, 7, 119-131. 13. Cook, T. E., 1986, “Merger and Acquisition,” Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 14. Cooke, T. E., 1986, “Voluntary Disclosure by Swedish Companies,” Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 1(2), pp1-25. 15. Das, T. K., and Teng. B., 2000, “A Resource-based Theory of Strrategic Alliances,” Journal of Management. 16. Eckbo, B. Espen, Ronald M. Giammarino and Robert L. Heinkel 1990, “Asymmetric information and the medium of exchange in takeovers: Theory and evidence,” Review of Financial Studies 3, 651–675. 17. Elgers & John J.Clark, 1980, “Merger Types and Shareholders Returns: Additional Evidence,” Financial Management Summer,p.66-72. 18. Fan, J. and Goyal, V., 2006, “On the Patterns and Wealth Effects of Vertical Mergers,” The Journal of Business, Vol. 79, No, 2, 877-902. 19. Fee, C.E. and Thomas. S., 2004, “Sources of gains in horizontal mergers: evidence from customer, supplier, and rival firms,” Journal of Financial Economics, 74, 423-460. 20. Fowler, K. L. and D. R. Schmidt., 1989, “Determinants of tender offer post-acquisition financial performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 10, pp. 339-350. 21. Foster, T. A. and Muller, E. J., 1990, “Third Parties: Your Passort to Profits,” Distribution, Vol. 89 No. 10, pp.31-32. 22. Gaughan, P. A., 1991, “Mergers and Acquisitions,” HarperCollins. 23. Ghosh, A., 2001, “Does Operating Performance Really Improve Following Corporate Acquisitions?” Journal of Corporate Finance. 24. Hagedoorn, J., and Duysters, G., 2002, “The Effect of Mergers and Acquisitions on the Technological Performance of Companies in a High-tech Environment,”Technology Analysis & Strategy Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2002. 25. Harris, R. S., and Ravenscraft, D., 1991, “The Role of Acquisitions in Foreign Direct Investment: Evidence from the U.S. Stock Market,” The Journal of Finance. 26. Healy, P. M., Palepu, K., and Ruback, R. S., 1992, “Does corporate performance improve after mergers?” Journal of Financial Economic. 27. Hill, J. W., and Jones, G., 1995, “Strategic management theory: An integrated Approach,” 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. 28. Hitt, M., Harrison, J., Ireland, R. D., and Best, A., 1998, “Attributes of Successful and Unsuccessful Acquisitions of US Firms,” British Journal of Management. 29. Huang, B.R., 2011, “The Performance of Cross-Border M&A: An Empirical Study of Listed Companies in Taiwan,” National Taiwan University Master Thesis. 30. Kedia, S., Ravid, S. A., and Pons, V., 2009, “Vertical Mergers and the Market Valuation of the Benefits of Vertical Integration,” Working Papers Series. 31. Kiessling. T., and R. G. Richey, 2005, “The Valuation of International Acquisitions from a Network Perspective and Market Based Competencies,” Journal of Business Strategies. 22(1): 1-20. 32. Kim,E.H.and J.J. McConnell., 1977, “Corporate Merger and the Co-Insurance of Corporate Debt?” The Journal of Finance, 32, p.349-365. 33. Kitching, J., 1967, “Why do mergers miscarry?” Harvard Business Review, 45(6), 84-101. 34. Kusewitt, J. B., “An Exploratory Study of Strategic Acquisition Factors Relating to Performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 6 (2), 1985, 151-169 35. LaFontaine, F. and M. Slade, 2007, “Vertical Integration and Firm Boundaries: the Evidence,” Journal of Economic Literature, Volume 135, 629-685. 36. Lewellen, W.G.,1971, A Pour Financial Rationale for the Conglomerate Merger,Journal of Finance,563-574. 37. Linn, Scott C. & Switzer, Jeannette A., 2001, “Are cash acquisitions associated with better postcombination operating performance than stock acquisitions?” Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 1113-1138, June. 38. Malatesta, P., 1983, “The wealth effect of merger activity and the objective functions of merging firms,” Journal of financial economics 11, 155-181. 39. Markides, C.C., and C.D. Itter, 1994, “Shareholder Benefits from Corporate International Diversification: Evidence from U.S. International Acquisitions,” Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 343-360. 40. Mueller, D.C., 1985, ‘Mergers and Market Share’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, 259-67. 41. Noori, H., 1990, “Managing the Dynamics of New Technology,” Pentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p143-157. 42. Opler, T. C., 1990, “Studies on Leveraged Buyout Finance and Corporate Mergers,” Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. 43. Perry, M.K., 1989, “Chapter 4 Vertical integration: Determinants and effects,” Handbook of Industrial Organization, Volume 1, 183-255. 44. Porter, M., 1980, Competitive Strategy, New York: The Free Press. 45. Ramanujam, V., and Venkatraman, N., 1986, “Measurement of Business Performance in Strategy Research: a Comparison of Approaches,” Academy of Management Review, 11:801--814. 46. Scherer, F. M., 1980, Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, Houghton Mifflin. 47. Seth, 1990, “Value creation in acquisitions：A Reexamination of performance issues,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol.11. 48. Stillman, Robert., 1983, “Examining Antitrust Policy Towards Horizontal Mergers,” Journal of Financial Economics, 11, pp.225-240, 49. Tseng, J.J., 2010, “Scope Expansion, Geographic Expansion and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Study of High-Tech M&A,” Journal of Management and Systems, Vol.17, No. 3. 50. Trautweun, F., 1990, “Merger Motives and Merger Prescriptions”, Strategic Management Journal, vol.11, iss.1, p.283-295. 51. Teece, D. J., 1980, Towards an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm, University of California, Berkeley. 52. Weston and Chung, 1983, “Do Mergers Make Money? A Research Summary, Mergers and Acquisitions.” 53. Wernerfelt. B., 1984, “A Resource-based View of the Firm,” Graduate School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan. 54. Weston, Mitchell, and Mulherin, 2004, Takeovers, Restructuring, and Corporate Governance, Pearson Prentice Hall. 55. Woo, C. Y., and Willard, G., 1983, “Performance Representation in Business Research: Discussion and Recommendation,” Annual National Meetings of the Academy of Management, Vol.8, No.1, pp.253-276. 56. Chung, Y. C., 2005, Micro Economics, Best-Wise Publishing Co., Ltd. 57. Huang, C. F., 2000, A Study on Core Supply Base in the General Contractor’s Subcontracting Strategy, National Central University Doctoral Thesis. 58. Chung, F. C., 2000, Case Study on Mergers and Acquisitions, National Taiwan University Master Thesis. 59. Kuo, C. L., 2008, Economic Research, Vol. 8. 60. Shu, Y. L., 2002, “The Diversification Change of Taiwan Business Group,” National Cheng Kung University Master Thesis. 61. Asquith, P., Bruner, R. F., and Mullins, D. W., 1983, “The Gains to Bidding Firms from Merger,” Journal of Financial Economics. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/4677 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 過去國外有很多研究分析併購案，包括水平併購、垂直併購等併購類型對績效的影響，而國內的論文也多以歐美的併購案例為主，就算有以台灣為基準進行研究，也多僅針對特定產業或特定併購方式，較少針對整體台灣市場同時進行水平、垂直併購分析，且普遍有樣本數不足的問題；至於在併購規模部分，則多以利益分配比例或併購成敗為主軸進行分析，如Damodaran(2012)認為大公司併購小公司較容易成功，反之則多以失敗告終，而本文則是同時探討大公司併小公司及小公司並大公司這兩種情形，以水平併購、垂直併購、跨業併購這三種併購類型，並擴大樣本數，結合併購規模來對台灣整體市場進行分析。
由於台灣經濟新報(TEJ)於2014年推出併購資料庫，並與公開資訊觀測站及新聞報導交叉比對，使樣本數大幅增加至872個，解決過去台灣併購資料庫中，樣本數過少以至於難以進行分析的困境。本文可將樣本數分為六組，探討這六組的差異。 根據單因子變異數分析結果，產業關聯度較低的併購案會使主併公司的短中長期併購表現較佳。此外，迴歸模型也證明本文挑選出來的七個自變數對股價報酬有顯著影響，尤其對長期股價報酬有明顯的影響。而當主併公司的規模大於目標公司時，營收成長率反而較差，反若主併公司的規模較小，營收成長率會較佳。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | A lot of foreign papers have been focusing on effects brought by different types of M&A on performance, including horizontal, vertical and conglomerated acquisitions. Papers published by Taiwanese scholars usually considered about foreign M&A cases and focused on a particular industry or M&A type. It is hard for most researches to focus on horizontal and vertical M&A at the same time. As to the firm scale, a common paper usually only analyzed distributions of M&A benefit for acquirers or target firm, or the key factor of successful M&A.
Owing to the launch of TEJ M&A database in 2014, this paper increases the sample sizes and classifies these data into six groups, trying to find the relationship between all of them. This new database solves the small sample size problem. The results suggest that the lower industrial relationship can create better M&A performances than the higher industrial relationship. Also, the regression model shows a striking effect of the seven independent variables on performance in the stock annual rate of return and the revenue growth rate, especially in the long term period. Besides, the bigger the acquirer size, the worse the revenue growth rate and vice versa. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-14T17:45:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-104-R01723047-1.pdf: 856307 bytes, checksum: b3f3f12fe7161c771b5566600448a412 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝詞 ............................................................................................................................... I
中文摘要 .......................................................................................................................... II Abstract .......................................................................................................................... III Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 3 Chapter 2 Theory and Hypotheses ................................................................................ 3 2.1 Resourced-Based Theory ................................................................................. 3 2.1.1The Development of RBV ...................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Core resources and capabilities ............................................................ 6 2.2 Merger and Acquisition .................................................................................. 10 2.2.1 Definition and Category ...................................................................... 10 2.2.2 M&A Motivation ................................................................................. 11 2.2.3 M&A Synergy ...................................................................................... 17 2.2.4 M&A Performance .............................................................................. 21 2.2.5 Relative Firm Size ................................................................................ 25 Chapter 3 Research Design and Methods .................................................................. 29 3.1 Independent Variables .................................................................................... 29 3.1.1 Independent Variables ......................................................................... 30 3.1.2 Dependent Variables ............................................................................ 32 3.2 Statistical Method ........................................................................................... 34 3.2.1 One-Way ANOVA ................................................................................ 35 3.2.2 Regression Analysis ............................................................................. 35 Chapter 4 Research Results ......................................................................................... 36 4.1 Hypotheses Results ......................................................................................... 36 4.1.1 Hypothesis 1 ......................................................................................... 36 4.1.2 Hypothesis 2 ......................................................................................... 39 4.2 Annual Rate of Return ................................................................................... 41 4.3 Financial Dependent Variables ...................................................................... 42 Chapter 5 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 44 Reference ....................................................................................................................... 45 2 List of Figures Figure 2-1: The Process to Explore the Company’s Resource .................................. 7 List of Tables Table 2-1: Classification of Resource ........................................................................... 9 Table 2-2: Scholars advocated M&A motivations .................................................... 15 Table 4-3: Post Hoc Test Results (t=2) ....................................................................... 37 Table 4-4: Post Hoc Test Results (t=3) ....................................................................... 38 Table 4-5: Post Hoc Test Results (t=4) ....................................................................... 38 Table 4-6: ANOVA Results (Hypothesis 2) ................................................................ 39 Table 4-7: Post Hoc Test Results (t=1) ....................................................................... 39 Table 4-8: Post Hoc Test Results (t=2) ....................................................................... 40 Table 4-9: Post Hoc Test Results (t=3) ....................................................................... 40 Table 4-10: Post Hoc Test Results (t=4) ..................................................................... 40 Table 4-11: Regression Results (Annual Rate of Return) ........................................ 42 Table 4-12: Regression Results (SGR) ....................................................................... 43 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.subject | 相對規模大小 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 併購 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Relative size | en |
| dc.subject | M&A | en |
| dc.title | 併購類型與併購雙方規模之差異對績效之影響－以台灣市場為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Impacts on Performances Brought By Varied Types of Mergers and Firm Sizes: An Example of Taiwan Market | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 103-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 周冠男,何耕宇 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 相對規模大小,併購, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Relative size,M&A, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 50 | |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2015-07-21 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 財務金融學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 財務金融學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-104-1.pdf | 836.24 kB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。