學術產出-學位論文
| 題名 | 合理性意見書是否具有資訊意涵?-以台灣上市公司併購案為例 Does Fairness Opinion Contain Useful Information? - The cases of M&A in Taiwan |
| 作者 | 林宇軒 |
| 貢獻者 | 岳夢蘭 林宇軒 |
| 關鍵詞 | 獨立專家 認證效果 事件研究法 併購綜效 Independent expert Certification effect Event study M&A synergy |
| 日期 | 2013 |
| 上傳時間 | 6-八月-2014 11:40:30 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要 | 本研究以2002年至2012年台灣主併公司為上市公司的併購案件為樣本，探討合理性意見書評價內容和主併公司短期股價影響及併購後綜效之關聯性。研究結果發現，於意見書揭露日時，若獨立專家評估價格高於雙方約定交易價格愈多時，即評價溢酬愈大，或是評價報告由高聲譽獨立專家所出具，主併公司會有正向的累積異常報酬率；且在此情況下，主併公司併購後綜效亦會愈大。故本研究認為，合理性意見書中的評價資訊，於揭露時具有訊號發射效果，可以幫助外部股東及投資人判斷交易是否對其有利，降低內外資訊不對稱，同時亦具有認證併購後公司會產生合併綜效之功能。因此，併購時獨立專家所出具之合理性意見書確實具有資訊意涵。 This study analyses the relation between target firm valuations disclosed in the fairness opinions and acquiring firm performances by using the samples of Taiwanese listed company in M&A transaction between 2002 and 2012. We find that the stock price reactions to the public disclosure of fairness opinions are positively related to the difference between target firms valuations contained in the fairness opinion and the merger offer price and the reputation of independent experts. Under these conditions, the synergy in the M&A may be higher than others. Therefore, we suggest that the information contained in the fairness opinions can not only reduce information asymmetry between management and stockholders, but also certify that the M&A transaction will produce synergy. We conclude that fairness opinion does contain useful information to market participants. |
| 參考文獻 | 林嬋娟、吳安妮(1992)，台灣企業併購綜效及績效之實證研究，會計評論，第26期(4月)，1-23。 孫梅瑞、陳隆麒(2002)，台灣地區上市公司從事併購活動對經營績效影響之研究，中山管理評論，第10卷第1期，155-184。 孫梅瑞、陳雅君(2010)，公司融資決策與併購績效關聯性之研究，商略學報，第2卷第3期，199-215。 陳傳毅(2010)，企業併購交易中獨立專家意見之功能與法律責任，東吳大學法律學系碩士在職專班法律專業組碩士論文。 陳楷仁(2011)，企業併購法第六條獨立專家相關問題之研析，國立臺北大學法律學系碩士論文。 黃玉雯(2012)，併購獨立專家之選擇及併購後綜效之探討，國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。 Bowers, H. M. (2002). Fairness opinions and the business judgment rule: an empirical investigation of target firms` use of fairness opinions. Northwestern University Law Review, 96, 567–578. Bowers, H. M., & Latham, W. R. (2004). Value of Fairness Opinions in US Mergers and Acquisitions,1980-2003. Working Paper, University of Delaware. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith Jr, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(0), 267-291. Cain, M. D., & Denis, D. J. (2013). Information production by investment banks: evidence from fairness opinions. Journal of Law and Economics, 56(1), 245-280. Carney, W. J. (1992). Fairness opinions: How fair are they and why we should do nothing about it. Washington University Law Quarterly, 70, 523. Chen, K. Y., & Wu, S.-Y. (2002). The effect of industry specialization on audit fees in Taiwan: The role of industry type. Working Paper. National Cheng Kung University. Chen, L. H., & Sami, H. (2010). Does the Use of Fairness Opinions Impair the Acquirers` Abnormal Returns? The Litigation Risk Effect. Advances in Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management, 4, 81-112. Elson, C. M. (1992). Fairness opinions: Are they fair or should we care? Ohio State Law Journal, 53, 951-970. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417. Francis, J. R., & Wilson, E. R. (1988). Auditor Changes: A Joint Test of Theories Relating to Agency Costs and Auditor Differentiation. The Accounting Review, 63(4), 663-682. Hudson, C. D., Jahera, J. S., Jr., & Lloyd, W. P. (1992). Further Evidence on the Relationship Between Ownership and Performance. The Financial Review, 27(2), 227. Kisgen, D. J., Qian, J. Q., & Song, W. (2009). Are fairness opinions fair? The case of mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Financial Economics, 91(2), 179-207. Klein, B., & Leffler, K. B. (1981). The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance. Journal of Political Economy, 89(4), 615. Liu, T. (2013). The Bidder`s Choice of a Fairness Opinion in Mergers and Acquisitions: The Impact on Value Creation. Working Paper. Makhija, A. K., & Narayanan, R. P. (2007). Fairness Opinions in Mergers and Acquisitions. Working Paper. Mayhew, B. W., & Wilkins, M. S. (2003). Audit Firm Industry Specialization as a Differentiation Strategy: Evidence from Fees Charged to Firms Going Public. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 22(2), 33-52. |
| 描述 | 碩士 國立政治大學 財務管理研究所 101357005 102 |
| 資料來源 | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101357005 |
| 資料類型 | thesis |
| dc.contributor.advisor | 岳夢蘭 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (作者) | 林宇軒 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | 林宇軒 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2013 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 6-八月-2014 11:40:30 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 6-八月-2014 11:40:30 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 6-八月-2014 11:40:30 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) | G0101357005 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/68231 | - |
| dc.description (描述) | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 財務管理研究所 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 101357005 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 102 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 本研究以2002年至2012年台灣主併公司為上市公司的併購案件為樣本，探討合理性意見書評價內容和主併公司短期股價影響及併購後綜效之關聯性。研究結果發現，於意見書揭露日時，若獨立專家評估價格高於雙方約定交易價格愈多時，即評價溢酬愈大，或是評價報告由高聲譽獨立專家所出具，主併公司會有正向的累積異常報酬率；且在此情況下，主併公司併購後綜效亦會愈大。故本研究認為，合理性意見書中的評價資訊，於揭露時具有訊號發射效果，可以幫助外部股東及投資人判斷交易是否對其有利，降低內外資訊不對稱，同時亦具有認證併購後公司會產生合併綜效之功能。因此，併購時獨立專家所出具之合理性意見書確實具有資訊意涵。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | This study analyses the relation between target firm valuations disclosed in the fairness opinions and acquiring firm performances by using the samples of Taiwanese listed company in M&A transaction between 2002 and 2012. We find that the stock price reactions to the public disclosure of fairness opinions are positively related to the difference between target firms valuations contained in the fairness opinion and the merger offer price and the reputation of independent experts. Under these conditions, the synergy in the M&A may be higher than others. Therefore, we suggest that the information contained in the fairness opinions can not only reduce information asymmetry between management and stockholders, but also certify that the M&A transaction will produce synergy. We conclude that fairness opinion does contain useful information to market participants. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究問題 3 第三節 研究架購 4 第二章 文獻探討 5 第一節 獨立專家制度簡介 5 第二節 相關文獻回顧 11 第三章 研究設計 14 第一節 研究假說 14 第二節 樣本選取與資料來源 16 第三節 研究方法 17 第四節 模型設定與變數衡量 20 第四章 實證結果 27 第一節 敘述統計分析及共線性檢定 27 第二節 短期股票異常報酬之實證分析 33 第三節 長期財務績效之實證分析 35 第五章 結論 39 第一節 研究結論 39 第二節 研究限制與後續研究建議 41 參考文獻 42 附錄一 44 附錄二 47 | zh_TW |
| dc.format.extent | 1923194 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.source.uri (資料來源) | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101357005 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 獨立專家 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 認證效果 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 事件研究法 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 併購綜效 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Independent expert | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Certification effect | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Event study | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | M&A synergy | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 合理性意見書是否具有資訊意涵?-以台灣上市公司併購案為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title (題名) | Does Fairness Opinion Contain Useful Information? - The cases of M&A in Taiwan | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | thesis | en |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 林嬋娟、吳安妮(1992)，台灣企業併購綜效及績效之實證研究，會計評論，第26期(4月)，1-23。 孫梅瑞、陳隆麒(2002)，台灣地區上市公司從事併購活動對經營績效影響之研究，中山管理評論，第10卷第1期，155-184。 孫梅瑞、陳雅君(2010)，公司融資決策與併購績效關聯性之研究，商略學報，第2卷第3期，199-215。 陳傳毅(2010)，企業併購交易中獨立專家意見之功能與法律責任，東吳大學法律學系碩士在職專班法律專業組碩士論文。 陳楷仁(2011)，企業併購法第六條獨立專家相關問題之研析，國立臺北大學法律學系碩士論文。 黃玉雯(2012)，併購獨立專家之選擇及併購後綜效之探討，國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。 Bowers, H. M. (2002). Fairness opinions and the business judgment rule: an empirical investigation of target firms` use of fairness opinions. Northwestern University Law Review, 96, 567–578. Bowers, H. M., & Latham, W. R. (2004). Value of Fairness Opinions in US Mergers and Acquisitions,1980-2003. Working Paper, University of Delaware. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith Jr, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(0), 267-291. Cain, M. D., & Denis, D. J. (2013). Information production by investment banks: evidence from fairness opinions. Journal of Law and Economics, 56(1), 245-280. Carney, W. J. (1992). Fairness opinions: How fair are they and why we should do nothing about it. Washington University Law Quarterly, 70, 523. Chen, K. Y., & Wu, S.-Y. (2002). The effect of industry specialization on audit fees in Taiwan: The role of industry type. Working Paper. National Cheng Kung University. Chen, L. H., & Sami, H. (2010). Does the Use of Fairness Opinions Impair the Acquirers` Abnormal Returns? The Litigation Risk Effect. Advances in Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management, 4, 81-112. Elson, C. M. (1992). Fairness opinions: Are they fair or should we care? Ohio State Law Journal, 53, 951-970. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417. Francis, J. R., & Wilson, E. R. (1988). Auditor Changes: A Joint Test of Theories Relating to Agency Costs and Auditor Differentiation. The Accounting Review, 63(4), 663-682. Hudson, C. D., Jahera, J. S., Jr., & Lloyd, W. P. (1992). Further Evidence on the Relationship Between Ownership and Performance. The Financial Review, 27(2), 227. Kisgen, D. J., Qian, J. Q., & Song, W. (2009). Are fairness opinions fair? The case of mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Financial Economics, 91(2), 179-207. Klein, B., & Leffler, K. B. (1981). The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance. Journal of Political Economy, 89(4), 615. Liu, T. (2013). The Bidder`s Choice of a Fairness Opinion in Mergers and Acquisitions: The Impact on Value Creation. Working Paper. Makhija, A. K., & Narayanan, R. P. (2007). Fairness Opinions in Mergers and Acquisitions. Working Paper. Mayhew, B. W., & Wilkins, M. S. (2003). Audit Firm Industry Specialization as a Differentiation Strategy: Evidence from Fees Charged to Firms Going Public. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 22(2), 33-52. | zh_TW |