“…They explain their results by proposing that private ownership leads to superior bargaining power, suggesting that the takeovers of privately held targets create superior total value, as acquirer gains do not appear to occur at the expense of private target gains. It needs to be mentioned that their study does not address the possibility that these relatively higher multiples are due to differences in accounting standards applicable to companies not listed on a major stock exchange (DiGabriele, 2007). Similarly, Lys and Yehuda (2011) report that the premium over the standalone value paid for privately held targets is generally higher, but is more than offset by higher synergies.…”
Section: Are Privately Held Enterprises Cheaper?mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was the last significant change to US securities law. Consequently, the due diligence process has become more rigorous and is now being consummated more slowly (DiGabriele, 2007). However, to date, no studies regarding the effect of SOX on value creation and acquisition premiums in takeover transactions in general have been published.…”
Section: Distribution Of the Created Valuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…De Franco, Gavious, Richardson, and Jin (2009) observe a decrease in enterprise value for small and medium enterprises not hiring one of the leading four audit companies (Big4), and conclude that the private enterprise discount can be explained by a lack of information quality facing the buyer rather than an illiquidity discount. Conducting an event study on the private enterprise discount, DiGabriele (2007) reports that, in the United States, the relative private enterprise discounts increased after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. He comments that unreliable information causes acquirers to bid less for privately held targets.…”
Section: Takeovers Of Privately Held Targetsmentioning
“…They explain their results by proposing that private ownership leads to superior bargaining power, suggesting that the takeovers of privately held targets create superior total value, as acquirer gains do not appear to occur at the expense of private target gains. It needs to be mentioned that their study does not address the possibility that these relatively higher multiples are due to differences in accounting standards applicable to companies not listed on a major stock exchange (DiGabriele, 2007). Similarly, Lys and Yehuda (2011) report that the premium over the standalone value paid for privately held targets is generally higher, but is more than offset by higher synergies.…”
Section: Are Privately Held Enterprises Cheaper?mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) was the last significant change to US securities law. Consequently, the due diligence process has become more rigorous and is now being consummated more slowly (DiGabriele, 2007). However, to date, no studies regarding the effect of SOX on value creation and acquisition premiums in takeover transactions in general have been published.…”
Section: Distribution Of the Created Valuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…De Franco, Gavious, Richardson, and Jin (2009) observe a decrease in enterprise value for small and medium enterprises not hiring one of the leading four audit companies (Big4), and conclude that the private enterprise discount can be explained by a lack of information quality facing the buyer rather than an illiquidity discount. Conducting an event study on the private enterprise discount, DiGabriele (2007) reports that, in the United States, the relative private enterprise discounts increased after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. He comments that unreliable information causes acquirers to bid less for privately held targets.…”
Section: Takeovers Of Privately Held Targetsmentioning
“…From the economic efficiency perspective, the cost can bring more benefits to larger firms. DiGabriele (2008) finds that since implementation of SOX, nonpublic firms have suffered a significant increase in loss of firm value. Menon and Williams (1994) show that firms with a larger board can benefit more from setting up an audit committee.…”
<p>This study attempts to inspection the efficient of using cash holdings whether is improved after setting up audit committee sound corporate governance from the perspective of reducing agency costs. We use the difference in difference method to investigate the effect of oversight of audit committee from 2007 to 2010 the company with audit committee for sample. The empirical results show that the using efficiency of cash holdings isn’t promoted after setting up audit committee with all listed companies sample. We further divided the sample into the over-the-counter (OTC) market and the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TSE) market according to the stock market feather. The empirical indicated that the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TSE) market listed sample exhibited the effect of oversight of audit committee; however, the over-the-counter (OTC) market listed is not. It indicated that the different market structure did affect the effect of oversight of audit committee.</p>
“…DiGabriele () finds evidence in the post‐SOX era that the private company discount has increased. However, the paper does not explore variation in the level of pre‐acquisition SOX compliance as a predictor of deal proceeds in either the pre‐ or post‐SOX period.…”
Public companies have been central to innovation and job creation. One reason why entrepreneurs work so hard, and why venture capitalists place so many risky bets, is because they hope to make a fortune by going public. IPOs provide young firms with cash to hire new hands and disrupt established markets. The alternative is to sell themselves to established firms-hardly a recipe for creative destruction. Imagine if the fledgling Apple and Google had been bought by IBM.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.