Conference Agenda

Tips to navigate the program:

  • Overview of all papers on a specific day: click on the day (e.g. Date: Thursday, 24/Aug/2017). To download papers, you will need to access the session by clicking on its title first.
  • Program index: click on the Authors tab below.
  • Location name: to display all sessions taking place in that room
  • Search box: to search for authors, papers and sessions.

Please notes that changes in the program might occur.

If your name is not displayed in the program, please register in our conference system.

If your paper information is not up to date, please send us an email at

Session Overview
CFGT-6: M&A and Product Markets
Friday, 25/Aug/2017:
10:30am - 12:00pm

Session Chair: Andrey Malenko, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Location: O133

Show help for 'Increase or decrease the abstract text size'

Selling Innovation in Bankruptcy

Song Ma1, Joy Tong2, Wei Wang3

1Yale University; 2Duke University; 3Queen's University

Discussant: William Giles Mann (UCLA)

This paper studies the asset reallocation decision of bankrupt firms in a novel setting of selling innovation, using a comprehensive dataset of patent transactions in bankrupt firms from 1980 to 2015. We first document systematic evidence on the pervasive phenomenon of selling innovation in bankruptcy. We then show that the decision of selling innovation is significantly determined by trading frictions associated with a patent - that is, in order to avoid costly asset illiquidity, bankrupt firms sell innovations that are more redeployable by other firms and can be traded in more liquid markets. The effect is stronger during industry distress and when there is a lack of access to finance in bankruptcy. We also provide evidence using hand collected data on the auctions of innovation in bankruptcy. Our findings suggest that the ex post cost of trading frictions in reallocating capital affects the asset reallocation decision ex ante.

EFA2017-438-CFGT-6-Ma-Selling Innovation in Bankruptcy.pdf

Why Are Underperforming Firms Rarely Acquired?

Yufeng Wu1, Wenyu Wang2

1University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; 2Indiana University

Discussant: Theodosios Dimopoulos (University of Lausanne)

Abstract Only 4.5% US firms in the bottom performance quintile are taken over annually, and the association between a firm's performance and its subsequent takeover exposure is close to zero. These observations cast doubts on the effectiveness of the takeover market to reallocate resources towards more efficient users and better management. In this paper, we revisit this problem by estimating a dynamic model in which takeovers are pursued either to enhance firm performance or to create control benefit for managers . Our estimates suggest that the takeover market is overall efficient with most value-enhancing mergers consummated quickly. Managers' entrenchment blocks less than 10% of the profitable deals. Meanwhile, an efficient takeover market triggers an ongoing selection effect so that underperforming firms with more entrenched managers survive longer. Even if this selection effect is small each period, it accumulates over time and is amplified as the economy evolves. As a result, underperforming firms become overrepresented by managers with high control benefit, leading to the weak takeover-performance sensitivity in data.

EFA2017-1298-CFGT-6-Wu-Why Are Underperforming Firms Rarely Acquired.pdf

Portfolio Diversification, Market Power, and the Theory of the Firm

Jose Ariel Azar

IESE Business School

Discussant: G√ľnter Strobl (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management)

This paper develops a model of firm behavior in the context of oligopoly and portfolio diversification by shareholders. Competition for shareholder votes among potential managers seeking corporate office leads to internalization and aggregation of shareholder objectives, including shareholdings in other firms, and the fact that shareholders are consumers and workers of the firms. When all shareholders hold market portfolios, firms that are formally separate behave as a single firm. I introduce new indices that capture the internalization effects from consumer/worker control, and discuss implications for antitrust, stakeholder theory, and the boundaries of the firm.

EFA2017-1588-CFGT-6-Azar-Portfolio Diversification, Market Power, and the Theory.pdf

Contact and Legal Notice · Contact Address:
Conference: EFA 2017
Conference Software - ConfTool Pro 2.6.113+TC
© 2001 - 2017 by H. Weinreich, Hamburg, Germany