New Zealand takeover notice provision selection and share price reaction

Journal of Multinational Financial Management

Volumn 8, Issue 2-3, 1998, Pages 317-332

  Tapping, Aiden ^a   Vos, Ed ^a   D'Mello, James ^b   Cheung, Joe ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

^b WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Defence provisions; G14; G15; G34; Share price reaction; Takeovers

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039492827     PISSN: 1042444X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1042-444x(98)00034-6     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Chandy P., Foster C., Braswell M. The shareholder wealth effects of the Pennsylvania fourth generation anti-takeover law. American Business Law Journal. 32:1995;399.
2. De Angelo G., Rice E. Anti-takeover charter amendments and stockholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics. 11:1983;329-360.
3. Easterbrook, F.H., Fishcel, D.R. 1991. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, Harvard University Press.
4. Fitzsimons, P., 1997. Takeover and Efficiency in the Context of Concentrated Shareholding: The Case of NZ, Tenth Maastricht Workshop in Law and Economics.
5. Fuller, R., Farrell, J., 1987. Modern Investments and Security Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York.
6. Janjigian V., Trahan E. An analysis of the decision to opt out of the Pennsylvania senate bill 1310. Journal of Financial Research. 19(1):1996;1.
7. Jarrell G.A., Netter J.M., Brickley J.A. Corporate control: empirical evidence since 1980. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2(1):1988;49-68.
8. Jensen M., Meckling W. Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics. 3(4):1976;305-360.
9. Kabir P., Cantrijn D., Jeunink A. Takeover defences, ownership structure and stock returns in the Netherlands: an empirical analysis. Strategic Management Journal. 18(2):1997;97-110.
10. Linn S., McConnell J. An empirical investigation of the impact of 'anti-takeover' amendments on common stock prices. Journal of Financial Economics. 11(1):1983;361-399.
11. Mandelbaum, A., 1993. Bidders' Initial stake in target companies and premiums paid to remaining shareholders in NZ full takeover offers: does it justify a mandatory offer rule?. Victoria University Discussion Paper 19.
12. Mahoney J.M., Mahoney J.T. An empirical investigation of the effects of corporate charter anti-takeover amendments on stock holder wealth. Strategic Management Journal. 14(1):1993;17-32.
13. Mahoney J.M., Sundaramurthy C., Mahoney J.T. The differential impact of stockholder wealth of various anti-takeover provisions. Managerial and Decision Economics. 17(6):1996;531-549.
14. Maynes E., Rumsey J. Event studies with thinly traded stocks. Journal of Banking and Finance. 17(1):1993;145-158.
15. McKenzie, 1993. Takeovers the New Zealand experience. In: Farrar (Ed.), Takeovers, Institutional Investors and the Modernisation of Corporate Laws, pp. 129-144.
16. McWilliams V. Are anti-takeover charter amendments good news or bad news for managers and shareholders. Journal of Applied Business Research. 10(2):1994;82-90.
17. New Zealand Stock Exchange Listing Rules, 1998. Wellington, New Zealand.
18. Rechner P.L., Sundaramurthy C., Dalton D. Corporate governance predictors of adoption of anti-takeover amendments: an empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics. 12(5):1993;371-378.
19. The Fact Book, New Zealand Stock Exchange, 1998.