{"title":"The Drivers of Market Efficiency in Revlon Transactions","authors":"Guhan Subramanian","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.389600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drawing from practitioner interviews and Gilson & Kraakman's \"mechanisms\" of market efficiency, I present the argument that the Delaware Supreme Court's decision in Revlon v. MacAndrews & Forbes, Inc. would reduce incentives to search and therefore would reduce overall efficiency in the market for corporate control. I compare this theoretical prediction to the evidence from the past seventeen years of takeover activity, and find no evidence that deal activity for Revlon transactions has been reduced. I argue that three drivers of market efficiency might explain this finding: small net first-bidder costs, preemptive bidding, and heterogeneous buyers. I present some evidence that the market for corporate control was primarily a private-value game in the 1990s, implying that buyer heterogeneity was an important driver of market efficiency. This paper is part of a Symposium commenting on Gilson & Kraakman, The Mechanisms of Market Efficiency, 70 Va. L. Rev. 549 (1984).","PeriodicalId":83094,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of corporation law","volume":"28 1","pages":"691"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of corporation law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.389600","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Abstract
Drawing from practitioner interviews and Gilson & Kraakman's "mechanisms" of market efficiency, I present the argument that the Delaware Supreme Court's decision in Revlon v. MacAndrews & Forbes, Inc. would reduce incentives to search and therefore would reduce overall efficiency in the market for corporate control. I compare this theoretical prediction to the evidence from the past seventeen years of takeover activity, and find no evidence that deal activity for Revlon transactions has been reduced. I argue that three drivers of market efficiency might explain this finding: small net first-bidder costs, preemptive bidding, and heterogeneous buyers. I present some evidence that the market for corporate control was primarily a private-value game in the 1990s, implying that buyer heterogeneity was an important driver of market efficiency. This paper is part of a Symposium commenting on Gilson & Kraakman, The Mechanisms of Market Efficiency, 70 Va. L. Rev. 549 (1984).