This paper is the first to look directly at the reaction of the London market to company announcements of changes to employee count. Using event study methodology, we examine market reactions to 54 redundancy announcements during the period 1990-1999 and 52 announcements of new jobs during the period 1993-1999. In line with previous US studies we find that market reaction, measured by cumulative abnormal returns, is negative before the day of redundancy announcement. The actual redundancy announcement is greeted positively by the market when measured in terms of the mean, but negatively when measured in terms of the median. Thus, in a minority of cases the announcements are seen as value enhancing. The market reacts positively before new job announcements and this positive reaction is highly significant when the announcement is made. The results suggest that new job announcements contain value-relevant information for the market. Potential causal factors other than announcement size are not significant. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002.

Using event study methodology, we examine market reactions to nearly 2,000 trading statements during the period 1995-2001. We find that profit warnings outnumber upgrades by 50%, and, in line with previous US studies, we find that market reaction to the actual announcements is considerably greater for profit warnings than for upgrades.Sub-samples demonstrate significant market reaction to profit warnings for all sizecontrolled portfolios, but that reaction to the announcements is greatest for small companies.Examination of pre- and post-announcement CARs shows no pre-announcement market anticipation of the announcements.Post-announcement there is a significant positive abnormal return on the day after the announcement of bad news for the small company subsample.Other post-announcement results are small and insignificant.Trading volume results are consistent with this picture. Finally, when the trading statements are examined for news on turnover and margin changes, we find that the market reaction to margin changes is greater than market reaction to turnover changes. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2004.

No abstract

No abstract

Prior literature on ethical concerns in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) has often concluded that many stakeholders, such as workers and communities, have unjustly suffered as a result of takeovers and associated defences and that their rights as stakeholders have been violated. However, very few papers provide any guidance on how to evaluate a merger or acquisition from an ethical standpoint. This study looks at how ethical frameworks could be used to assess the ethical impact of a merger or acquisition and gives practical guidance. It is proposed that decision makers should consider the impact on four stakeholder groups: shareholders, employees, customers and directors. We call the proposed method for doing this Partial Utilitarian analysis. We suggest two possible ways of applying the Partial Utilitarian analysis. One approach could rely on the evidence from a sample of recent deals. For this, empirical analysis is conducted on a sample of large M&As in the United Kingdom in the period 1993-2003. Alternatively, a better approach, requiring considerable management time, requires forecasting of the economic impact on the four groups of stakeholders. The paper shows how to do this.