Economic effects of first generation state antitakeover statutes on target firm shareholders
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bebchuk, 1982, The case for facilitating competing tender offer defense, Harvard Law Review, 95, 1028, 10.2307/1340571
Brown, 1985, Using daily stock returns: The case of event studies, Journal of Financial Economics, 14, 3, 10.1016/0304-405X(85)90042-X
Easterbrook, 1981, The proper role of a target's management in responding to a tender offer, Harvard Law Review, 94, 1161, 10.2307/1340753
Easterbrook, 1982, Auctions and sunk costs in tender offers, Stanford Law Review, 35, 1, 10.2307/1228378
Fama, 1969, The adjustment of stock prices to new information, International Economic Review, 1, 10.2307/2525569
Gilson, 1982, Seeking competitive bids versus pure passivity in tender offer defense, Stanford Law Review, 35, 51, 10.2307/1228380
Guerin-Calvert, 1987, State and federal regulation in the market for corporate control, Antitrust Bulletin, 32, 661, 10.1177/0003603X8703200305
Hackl, 1988, Second generation state takeover statutes and shareholder wealth: An empirical study, The Yale Law Journal, 97, 1193, 10.2307/796347
Hollander, 1973
Jarrell, 1980, The economic effects of federal and state regulations of cash tender offers, Journal of Law & Economics, 23, 371, 10.1086/466965
Jensen, 1983, The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence, Journal of Financial Economics, 11, 5, 10.1016/0304-405X(83)90004-1
Margotta, 1990, An analysis of the stock price effect of the 1986 Ohio takeover legislation, Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 6, 235
Nicholes, 1985
Romano, 1987, The political economy of takeover statutes, Virginia Law Review, 73, 111, 10.2307/1073029
Ryngaert, 1990, Shareholder wealth effects of the 1986 Ohio antitakeover law revisited: Its real effects, Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 6, 253
Turk, 1992, Takeover resistance, information leakage, and target firm value, Journal of Management, 18, 503, 10.1177/014920639201800305
Warren, 1985, Developments in state takeover regulation: MITE and its aftermath, The Business Lawyer, 40, 671